0720

15 July 2020 Monthly Year 4

Philosophers of Contagion: How Intellectuals Perceive Covid-19

A Universal Wage: An urgent social debate

Against Religious Nationalism .07 o John Paul II Communicator

Syria and Turkey Battle for Idlib Province

Rembrandt, the Artist in the Mirror of the Word OLUME 4, N 4, OLUME V Church Numbers in the World 2020 2020 Modi’s India: Between Hindu Traditionalism and Coronavirus

The Letter To The Galatians: ‘The Truth of the Gospel’

Death in the Digital Age

‘A New Imagination of the Possible’ Seven Images from Francis for Post Covid-19

BEATUS POPULUS, CUIUS DOMINUS DEUS EIUS

Copyright, 2020, Union of Catholic Asian Editor-in-chief News ANTONIO SPADARO, SJ

All rights reserved. Except for any fair Editorial Board dealing permitted under the Hong Kong Antonio Spadaro, SJ – Director Copyright Ordinance, no part of this Giancarlo Pani, SJ – Vice-Director publication may be reproduced by any Domenico Ronchitelli, SJ – Senior Editor means without prior permission. Inquiries Giovanni Cucci, SJ, Diego Fares, SJ should be made to the publisher. Giovanni Sale, SJ, Claudio Zonta, SJ Federico Lombardi, SJ Title: La Civiltà Cattolica, English Edition Emeritus editors ISSN: 2207-2446 Virgilio Fantuzzi, SJ Giandomenico Mucci, SJ ISBN: GianPaolo Salvini, SJ 978-988-79271-2-9 (ebook) 978-988-79271-3-6 (kindle) Contributors Published in Hong Kong by George Ruyssen, SJ (Belgium) UCAN Services Ltd. Fernando de la Iglesia Viguiristi, SJ (Spain) Drew Christiansen, SJ (USA) P.O. Box 69626, Kwun Tong, Andrea Vicini, SJ (USA) Hong Kong David Neuhaus, SJ (Israel) Phone: +852 2727 2018 Camillo Ripamonti, SJ (Italy) Fax: +852 2772 7656 www.ucanews.com Vladimir Pachkow, SJ (Russia) Arturo Peraza, SJ (Venezuela) Publishers: Michael Kelly, SJ and Bert Daelemans, SJ (Belgium) Robert Barber Thomas Reese, SJ (USA) Production Manager: Paul Soukup, SJ (USA) Grithanai Napasrapiwong Friedhelm Mennekes, SJ (Germany) Marcel Uwineza, SJ (Rwanda) Marc Rastoin, SJ (France) You Guo Jiang, SJ (China) Luke Hansen, SJ (USA) CONTENTS 0720

15 July 2020 Monthly Year 4

1 Philosophers of Contagion How Intellectuals Perceive Covid-19 Cristian Peralta, SJ

13 A Universal Wage: An urgent social debate Gaël Giraud, SJ

27 Against Religious Nationalism Joseph Lobo, SJ

39 John Paul II Communicator Federico Lombardi, SJ

54 Syria and Turkey Battle for Idlib Province Giovanni Sale, SJ

66 Rembrandt, the Artist in the Mirror of the Word Lucian Lechintan, SJ

72 Church Numbers in the World GianPaolo Salvini, SJ

76 Modi’s India: Between Hindu Traditionalism and Coronavirus Giovanni Sale, SJ

89 The Letter To The Galatians: ‘The Truth of the Gospel’ Giancarlo Pani, SJ

98 Death in the Digital Age Giovanni Cucci, SJ

109 ‘A New Imagination of the Possible’ Seven Images from Francis for Post Covid-19 Antonio Spadaro, SJ LCC 0820: AUGUST

AUGUST TITLES

• What Future for Europe?

• The Pandemic has Opened a Breach in the Way We Think INDIVIDUAL SUBSCRIPTION About Reality $49.95 FOR 12 MONTHS

• Universalism in The Bible ● Ideal for Church leaders, theologians, scholars, seminarians etc • Working Jesus ● Monthly editions available both in ePub and • Querida Amazonia, between Mobi Story And Metaphor ● Subscriber gets unlimited online access • “I Believe in The Holy Spirit” ● Access to Perspectives Series - Six Thematic Issues of the Journal

GROUP SUBSCRIPTION $250 FOR TWELVE MONTHS

● Ideal for Catholic universities, libraries, institutes, congregations etc.

● Multi-user, unlimited access for one year.

● Subscribers access unlimited logins in different devices within the same IP address

● Monthly editions available both in ePub and Mobi

● Access to Perspectives Series - Six Thematic Issues of the Journal

For educational and bulk rates, please email [email protected] SUBSCRIBE TODAY AT laciviltacattolica.com Philosophers of Contagion How Intellectuals Perceive Covid-19

Cristian Peralta, SJ

The outbreak of a new disease leads to uncertainty and fear, especially if we are among those most vulnerable. Depending on our ability to protect ourselves and our access to medical devices, the threat affects the way we understand it and respond. 1 Here we want to explore a specific characteristic of the viral threat that affects us: its ability to reveal.

Covid-19, silent revealer of hidden realities To unveil is to discover something hidden, to bring it to light, to remove the veil and reveal. Covid-19, among its many connotations, is a silent revealer of many realities that often remain hidden in the everyday life of economic, political, social and cultural systems in which we are immersed in one way or another. Crossing rigid and guarded borders, it has denounced xenophobic, nationalist and racist policies whose discourses it has made unconvincing. It is constantly accusing the health systems of those countries which, having neglected to invest sufficiently in public health or having handed over its administration to the private sector, today have no alternative but to recognize the value of a quality health system accessible to all. The virus highlights the true concerns of scientific researchers and the large pharmaceutical companies that finance them. It highlights the voracity of a global market that rubs its hands with the ointment of speculation. This infectious agent brings to light the search for complicit silence by an economic system that puts capital above human beings. At the same time, it bitterly exposes the neglect

La Civiltà Cattolica, En. Ed. Vol. 4, no. 07 art. 1, 0620: 10.32009/22072446.0720.1 PHILOSOPHERS OF CONTAGION: HOW INTELLECTUALS PERCEIVE COVID-19 of education systems, of the protection of the elderly, national production, workers’ rights, the housing sector, the fight against extreme poverty and malnutrition. It rejects the shortcomings of political authorities and lays its eternal allies bare. It unmasks individualists, hoarders, those who seek to engage in corruption. It makes manifest the inequality of peoples, even spreading into countries – unlike other epidemics – by transmission through the wealthier classes, those who can travel. With appropriate distinctions, Covid-19 could be considered the most effective and prophetic Accuser of our times. To carry out its task, however, it uses a cruel method: the death of hundreds of thousands of people. Perhaps this is what Albert Camus was referring to when he wrote that “the plague loves the secret of the nest.”1 It seems apposite to us to consider this effective “revealer” 2 through the reflections it has provoked as it spreads. The Spanish philosopher Patricia Manrique2 has warned, however, of the need to be careful so that the novelty of the events we analyze does not distract us from the actual reality. And she recalls with Emmanuel Lévinas that rushing to say something ends up reducing “otherness” to “sameness.”3 The warning is not out of place. The enormous flow of reflections about the pandemic that come in these times from the intellectual world and the way they flatten out prior thought betrays a reflective haste. For this reason, Manrique relies on the necessary “hospitality of otherness,” which allows ideology and “selfishness” to give way to the novelty born of the reality we are trying to understand. Her invitation suggests letting the new reality evoke questions and generate a calm search for answers. She proposes a countercultural way of analyzing reality. Haste in the process of reflection, in fact, appears curiously akin to the capitalist productivism that many intellectuals wish to counteract. There is an anxiety to fill the open spaces with the criticism of postmodern culture that emerges from contemporary philosophy, anthropology and sociology.

1.A. Camus, “Exhortation to Doctors of the Plague.” 2.Cf. P. Manrique, “Hospitalidad e inmunidad virtuosa”, in L a Vo rá gin e (lavoragine.net/hospitalidad-inmunidad-virtuosa), March 27, 2020. 3.See E. Lévinas, Totalità e infinito, Milan, Jaca Book, 2006. CRISTIAN PERALTA, SJ

Reflections on the pandemic from the world of intellectuals Let us now observe some reactions to the pandemic from the intellectual world. The Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben4 did not hesitate to denounce something that has always been one of his research themes: the state of exception chosen as the normal methodology of government. Starting from this he defined the measures to ensure isolation as disproportionate and referred to the epidemic as a pretentious invention, aimed at limiting one of the most important values of the West: freedom. He branded the confinement measures as an exaggerated reaction to what he claimed was “a normal flu.” He has reduced the virus to a mere ideological substitute for terrorism, insofar as it justifies exceptionality and causes collective panic, a panic 3 that a few days later he denounced as the cause of the abolition of the category of “neighbors” by virtue of the paradigm of the asymptomatic carrier.5 This, according to him, generates fear of encounter and therefore the annulment of political action, the ultimate objective of those rulers, whose adopted measures he has denounced as harsher than those of Fascism and Nazism.6 Camus, in the text we have quoted, states: “It is up to you to think often of your ignorance, to make sure you observe the measure, the only master of the plague.”7 It did not take that many deaths to recognize the threat as genuine, and the measures of distancing as a way of caring for others. The Catalan chemist and philosopher Santiago López Petit8 immediately echoed Agamben, claiming that the virus was produced by capitalism – which he considers in itself murderous – to normalize the state of exception. According to him, unbridled capitalism articulates its agro-industry and shapes the aetiology

4.See G. Agamben, “L’invenzione di un’epidemia”, in Quodlibet (www. quodlibet.it/giorgio-agamben-l-invenzione-di-un-epidemia), February 26, 2020. 5.See Id., “Contagio”, ibid. (www.quodlibet.it/giorgio-agamben-contagio), March 11, 2020. 6.See Id., “Nuove riflessioni”, ibid. (www.quodlibet.it/giorgio-agamben- nuove-riflessioni), April 22, 2020. 7.A. Camus, “Exhortation to Doctors of the Plague” op. cit. 8.See S. López Petit, “El coronavirus com a declaració de guerra”, in Critic (www.elcritic.cat/opinio/santiago-lopez-petit/el-coronavirus-com-a- declaracio-de-guerra-52417), March 18, 2020. PHILOSOPHERS OF CONTAGION: HOW INTELLECTUALS PERCEIVE COVID-19 of recent pandemics in such a way as to produce the virus, which it will then use to control the population. To be precise, he warns that this is not so much a conspiracy, but rather the logical consequence of being victims of the “algorithm of life,” which programs everything and puts political decision and national interests in the foreground – using the neoliberal consensus. For his part, Slavoj Žižek,9 one of the most provocative sociologists of the moment, hastened to proclaim as deadly the blows inflicted on capitalism and the reinvention of communism as consequences of the Covid-19 pandemic. His position is based on a peculiar optimism. He notes that the virus has highlighted pandemics already existing in our societies: the fake news and paranoid conspiracy theories, as well as manifestations of racism and xenophobia. On the 4 other hand, it offers the contagious and virtuous possibility of dreaming of an alternative society. On this basis Žižek goes so far as to imagine a radical transformation of the world economic system based on the abrupt rediscovery of a shared biological and ecological vulnerability. His proposal is to adopt communism as a political and economic system, but not in the old way, rather as a communism of solidarity, trust, science and commitment, all governed, according to his proposal, by a global economic regulatory body. The enthusiasm of his presentation projects a view of the future that borders on naivety and contrasts with the total absence, in his reflection, of the human consequences of the pandemic. Certainly, ideological enthusiasm can preclude an objective look at the pain that surrounds us. The debate was not long in coming. Byung-Chul Han,10 a Korean philosopher living in Berlin, is less optimistic than Žižek. He believes that capitalism will not only follow its usual

9.See S. Žižek, “Il coronavirus è un colpo al capitalismo à la Kill Bill che potrebbe reinventare il comunismo”, in Overlays (www.sovrapposizioni. com/blog/il-coronavirus-un-colpo-al-capitalismo-la-kill-bill-che-potrebbe- reinventare-il-comunismo), March 6, 2020. 10.See B.C. Han, “L’emergenza virale e il mondo di domani”, in Global Project (www.globalproject.info/it/mondi/lemergenza-virale-e-il-mondo-di- domani/22678), April 1, 2020. CRISTIAN PERALTA, SJ

course but that we will see China as a watchdog and hoarder of world production. Capitalism will continue, according to him, because its disappearance would mean a radical change in well-established lifestyles, and also because, for this to happen, the will to transform the world’s economic powers, which in these circumstances continue to accumulate profits, would be necessary. He is emphatic: “the virus cannot replace reason,” let alone “generate any strong collective feeling.” Therefore, it does not have the revolutionary capacity that Žižek attributes to it. However, Han would like to see a world in which individualism would lose its centrality, to be replaced by an encounter with the “negativity of the other,” as he has continually stressed in his work.11 He proposes this from a more collectivist 5 perspective, denouncing absurd measures, such as the closing of borders, or even closing an eye to the attenuation of privacy, in the oriental way, for the control of future pandemics. His great fear, as for Agamben, is that the virus will turn into a justification for exceptional opportunities for totalitarianism. Unfortunately, without going into them and relegating them to the sidelines, Han overlooks data such as the number of deaths caused by the virus or the supposedly preventive triage suffered by the elderly in the distribution of care and clinical attention. The Italian philosopher Franco Berardi12 also added his share of skepticism as to the imminent fall of capitalism. However, he believes that neoliberalism will take advantage of this pandemic to further extend its tentacles. It will do so, he says, relying on new forms of control and the segregation of populations: in other words, exploiting biopolitics and totalitarianism. Berardi is convinced that both these dynamics will become established, given that culturally we are not prepared for the deprivation of mobility and for separating pleasure from consumption, let alone giving value to frugality and sharing. This look at humanity leads him to an ambiguous diagnosis: from this crisis

11.See B.C. Han, La società della stanchezza, Milan, nottetempo, 2012; Id., L’espulsione dell’altro, ibid., 2017. See also M. Rastoin, “Ritrovare il senso del tempo. Riflessioni sul pensiero di Byung-Chul Han”, in Civ. Catt. 2019 I 32-41. 12.See F. Berardi, “Cronaca della psicodeflazione”, in Nero Editions (not. neroeditions.com/cronaca-della-psicodeflazione), March 16, 2020. PHILOSOPHERS OF CONTAGION: HOW INTELLECTUALS PERCEIVE COVID-19 we will come out either more individualistic, aggressive, selfish and competitive, or more supportive and eager for equality. I believe that it is too early to draw conclusions, but at the same time I think that there is still time to try, at least, to influence the final outcome of the pandemic. There willbe work to be done. Berardi’s assessment of human possibilities and contemporary culture does not inspire hope. However, this is not the only truth concerning human beings: in the world there are also desires, will and opportunities for a greater commitment in the direction of justice, empathy and solidarity. For her part, the philosopher Judith Butler,13 in the socio- political context of the United States, insists that the virus does not discriminate, whereas the same cannot be said of us human beings. The result, in her view, is the link between nationalism, 6 racism, xenophobia and capitalism in shaping the discriminatory relationships that the pandemic can provoke, with the harmful result that some lives are valued as more valuable than others. Butler argues that the social and economic inequality that prevails in the world allows the virus to discriminate against access to medical care and, in the future, to the long-awaited vaccine. But, once again, the discrimination is not to be attributed to the virus. The complaint must be channeled to those responsible for political, social and economic systems, which classify people into categories according to purchasing power, ethnic origin and migratory documents, ensuring that they are perceived and treated as second-class human beings. Discrimination, economic pressure and the dynamics that create social exclusion today show their true face. Indifference and apathy in the face of the situation of those who suffer some of these dynamics should not be among the options for shaping our future. This type of discriminatory “virus,” which could now explode, taking advantage of the biological threat that confines us in our homes, is also denounced by the anthropologist David Harvey,14

13.See J. Butler, “Il capitalismo è giunto al suo limite”, in Dinamo Press (www.dinamopress.it/news/capitalismo-giunto-al-suo-limite), March 20, 2020. 14.Cf. D. Harvey, “Anti-Capitalist Politics in the Time of Covid-19”, in Jacobin Magazine (jacobinmag.com/2020/03/david-harvey-coronavirus- political-economy-disruptions), March 20, 2020. CRISTIAN PERALTA, SJ

who investigates the current possibilities of global capitalism. He does not consider it accidental that the emergency caused by the virus has brought about a global economic imbalance. According to him, this is due to a neoliberal policy focused on business rather than on people and their well-being. Today it is necessary to put people at the center of public policy and the economy., Creative and committed forms must therefore be sought, to influence individuals and communities to shape a more supportive, human and ecologically sustainable future. Philosophers like Alain Badiou15 have a more pessimistic view of the revolutionary capacity of the virus, given the discouraging naivety of the analyses and proposals that have arisen in relation to the pandemic. Badiou goes so far as to 7 affirm that one of the effects of the pandemic is to dissolve part of the intrinsic activity of reason, giving rise to mysticisms, prophecies, fairytales and completely unfounded curses. He also observes that the complexity of the current situation mixes together natural and social causes, economic and political, local and transnational dimensions, and therefore does not allow for unique or really innovative solutions. In fact, in the face of fear, to protect ourselves, we cling to what we already know.

Borders and solutions As a result of this dynamic, politicians are proposing solutions to the pandemic that seek to keep the economic system as intact as possible. In fact, this has triggered a most extensive debate – no less questionable from a moral point of view – which aims to distinguish between the health of people and the saving of the economy. However, saving the latter could mean leaving intact the capital-focused economy that generates a spiral of inequality, lack of opportunities, job insecurity and world hunger, which is exactly what disregards half of humanity and prevents it from living in dignity.16 Choosing the saving of the economy, the

15.See A. Badiou, “Sulla situazione epidemica”, in Filosofia in movimento (filosofiainmovimento.it/sulla-situazione-epidemica), March 23, 2020. 16.See A. V. Banerjee - E. Duflo, Repensar la pobreza. Un giro radical en la lucha contra la desigualdad global, Barcelona, Taurus, 2014; T. Piketty, Il capitale nel XXI secolo, Milan, Bompiani, 2016. PHILOSOPHERS OF CONTAGION: HOW INTELLECTUALS PERCEIVE COVID-19 kind of economy in which we are immersed, as the focus of public policy, would be tantamount to segregating the poorest behind the wall of indifference. There is an urgent need for solidarity-based and socially responsible economic proposals to improve the lives of those who suffer the most. The German philosopher Gabriel Markus17 believes that Covid-19 emphasizes the idea of global unity and the equality of all humanity. Facing the virus, he says, we are nothing more than this: humans, hosts for its reproduction; there are no differences. This is why Markus questions the usefulness of closing borders between countries, if only to prevent the collapse of national health systems. In the same way, he criticizes the pre-pandemic world order, calling it lethal. He proposes a new enlightenment that can educate coming generations in ethics so 8 that they do not fall into blind faith in science and technology, now in disgrace for not having been able to contain this viral threat. He therefore calls for a “metaphysical pandemic.”18 The return to normality should not lead to rapidly forgetting what has happened, but to a commitment of solidarity generated by a shared humanity. The Israeli historian Yuval Noah Harari19 joins Markus and Han in denouncing the absurd closure of the borders.20 He makes a twofold appeal: to look beyond the urgency of the pandemic and to think about the world in which we want to live after the pandemic is over. Along this line, Harari puts forward the following alternatives: either totalitarian surveillance

17.Cf. G. Markus, “El orden mundial previo al virus era letal”, in El País (elpais. com/cultura/2020/03/21/babelia/1584809233_534841.html), March 25, 2020. 18.Here we can quote Camus again: “You, then, plague doctors, you must strengthen yourselves against the idea of death and reconcile yourselves with it, before entering the kingdom that the plague is preparing for you. If you are victorious on this point, you will always be victorious and you will be seen to smile in the midst of terror. Conclude that you need to be philosophers”, in “L’irruzione dell’assurdo”, op. cit. 19.See Y. N. Harari, “Il mondo dopo il virus”, in International (https://www. internazionale.it/notizie/yuval-noah-harari/2020/04/06/mondo-dopo-virus), April 6, 2020. 20.Cfr Id., “In the Battle Against Coronavirus, Humanity Lacks Leadership”, in Time (time.com/5803225/yuval-noah-harari-coronavirus-humanity-leadership), March 15, 2020. CRISTIAN PERALTA, SJ

or legitimization of citizens; either nationalist isolation or global solidarity. What he fears is cyber surveillance that limits freedom. When people are asked to choose between their privacy and their health, they are reduced to considering a misleading option. Harari makes it clear that without trust and global solidarity, the pandemic cannot be successfully countered. He concludes that the solution to the pandemic will not come from segregation, but from cooperation. In this respect, we believe that cooperation must be inspired by a high degree of social justice, fairness and the pursuit of the common good. The English philosopher and politician John Gray21 believes that we are witnessing a farewell to hyperglobalization. According to him, bio-vigilance by the state, to which 9 individuals will be willing to agree for their own safety, will be the post-liberal way of governing. He states that the political system will remain intact and at the same time will be the engine of a change of perspective in the management of the world market, which would become more balanced by local production and based less on efficiency. This seems a singular statement. His proposal foresees the same actors who will take a very short time to achieve such a radical transformation. Curiously, Gray considers as “magic thinking” the belief that increased international cooperation will be the key to solving the viral and economic emergency. To this should be added the fact that the population, faced with the loss of mobility, will give way to virtualization. In the English philosopher’s proposal, one perceives haste. Such a drastic and accelerated change in the economy and culture cannot take place from isolation and passivity:. There must be at least empathy, encounter, dialogue, and commitment to solidarity. As we can see, among contemporary thinkers there is a concern about the political, economic and social dimensions that could threaten the freedom of citizens. Some draw proposals from the left, others from the intellectual right. What is certain

21.Cf. J. Gray, “Adiós globalización, empieza un mundo nuevo. O por qué esta crisis es un punto de inflexión en la historia”, in El País (elpais. com/ideas/2020-04-11/adios-globalizacion-empieza-un-mundo-nuevo .html?ssm=FB_CC), April 12, 2020. PHILOSOPHERS OF CONTAGION: HOW INTELLECTUALS PERCEIVE COVID-19 is that it is still too early to know what political, economic or psychological consequences we will have to deal with. We do not know whether our culture will change radically or whether it will soon resume the rhythms of before. We are left with the imagination as an intellectual vaccine, according to David Grossman to.22

A global transformation Now, allow me to take the liberty of going through that process whose criticism I praised along with Patricia Manrique: I will give my own opinion. I believe – and I say this making a conscious and reckless generalization – that the concerns of the intellectual class are more related to a comfortable imagination than to a deep look at the reality that people live. Those who 10 look carefully at the many articles appearing, looking for words like “poverty,” “destitute,” “marginalization” or “social exclusion,” will notice how they are, in great measure, absent from reflection today. It is surprising that the word “vulnerable” is only employed in relation to those who might be most affected by the virus, i.e. in the sense of: “biological vulnerability.”23 In the Latin American context, some sporadic reflections have also emerged more closely linked to traditional North-South themes or postcolonial imperialism, at least in the philosophical but not in the theological sphere.24 Is it not true that in our haste to express opinions, we have forgotten the poor? Is it not mounting a veiled defense of liberalism, to highlight to such an extent the limits of individual and collective freedoms? We do not know, and we do not want to blame anyone either.

22.See D. Grossman, “Un mismo tejido humano infeccioso”, ibid. (elpais. com/elpais/2020/03/26/opinion/1585218634_070526.html), April 12, 2020. 23.See H.T. Have, Vulnerability: challenging bioethics, New York, Routledge, 2016. On the subject, see also D. Fares, “Paradoxes of Vulnerability”, in laciviltacattolica.com/paradoxes-of-vulnerability/ 24.Cf. R. Zibechi, “A las puertas de un nuevo orden mundial”, in El Salto (www.elsaltodiario.com/coronavirus/geopolitica-china-estados-unidos-union- europea-a-toda-velocidad-hacia-el-caos-sistemico), March 25, 2020; M. Galindo, “Desobediencia, por tu culpa voy a sobrevivir”, in Radio Deseo (http:// radiodeseo.com/desobediencia-por-tu-culpa-voy-a-sobrevivir-maria-galindo), March 2020. CRISTIAN PERALTA, SJ

I find myself writing these lines from a teachers’ residence in Madrid, where we have a large garden in which we can walk and, although we have a person at home infected with the virus, the size of the environment allows us to keep her isolated and protect ourselves from the danger of infection. If we look at reality only from where we live, the biggest drawback for many of us might be that we cannot move freely outside. But we also see that right here, around us, there are homeless people who are having a very bad time, that many people are losing their jobs, or that there is a risk that, when all this is over, they will have no place to live. Quarantine for a large family living in a small house is a form of torment. Young people run the risk that their already usual job insecurity will 11 be amplified. In many corners of the world, migrant workers and populations suffering racial discrimination are the most affected by the virus, which catches them without resources, without health insurance, stigmatized by exclusion and inequality. This reality is largely absent from many of the considerations being written. For this reason, if we are allowed to imagine a global transformation, it must arise “from below,” from the integration of the excluded of this world. For this to happen, the intellectual class will have to associate itself with the revealing and accusatory function of Covid-19, or everything will be limited to merely support the re-establishment of the previous order, in which the outcasts will return still invisible to the real powers of this world. If the virus is showing the vulnerability of rich countries and their susceptibility to death – as it is for all human beings – we must not ignore or forget that this situation is by no means new for those in this world who find themselves in extreme poverty, even before and without the coronavirus. They habitually live with death, both because of the absence of essential services (water, medical care, etc.) and because of their vulnerability to systematic violence. There is no doubt that reflections on biopolitics, computer surveillance, pharmacopornography25

25.Cf. P. B. Preciado, “Aprendiendo del virus”, in El País (elpais.com/ elpais/2020/03/27/opinion/1585316952_026489.html), March 28, 2020. PHILOSOPHERS OF CONTAGION: HOW INTELLECTUALS PERCEIVE COVID-19 or psychopolitics are interesting, nor will we question the relevance of the philosopher Michel Foucault; but we must be aware that these issues are important for a minority of human beings. Hunger, malnutrition, lack of access to drinking water, violence of all kinds, social and health insecurity, corruption, poor quality education systems, job insecurity, and so on constitute the everyday life of more than half of humanity. Covid-19 highlights all of this. Given that the pandemic has hit the richest countries hard, will the concerns of the intellectual world change now that it is very clear that we are all the same? Hoping that the imagination will not mock us, I believe that any possible cultural transformation of the world as a result of shared biological vulnerability will only be effective if we acknowledge that the improvement of living 12 conditions for all will benefit the whole of humanity. I hope that in these philosophical wanderings we will not forget those who, marginalized by social, economic, political and cultural systems, should in fact occupy the center of our prophetic denunciations and be the focus of our concerns and actions. I am convinced that this would make us more human. A Universal Wage: An urgent social debate

Gaël Giraud, SJ

In his Letter to the People’s Movements published on Easter Day, April 12, 2020, Pope Francis called for the establishment of a “universal basic wage”: “This may be the time to consider a universal basic wage which would acknowledge and dignify 13 the noble, essential tasks you carry out. It would ensure and concretely achieve the ideal, at once so human and so Christian, of no worker without rights.”1 The proposal has not failed to elicit both enthusiastic and critical reactions. Does this statement mean that the Holy Father embraces the cause of a universal income to be paid to all without conditions? Or does he intend to defend the principle of a fair wage for all workers? And then, if we are really talking about a universal income without conditions, how can our faith guide us in evaluating the practical conditions for its implementation? Or is it simply an unrealizable goal? These are especially urgent questions today since the often inhuman management of the coronavirus pandemic in many countries threatens to plunge a large part of our planet into an economic depression at least as serious as that experienced in the 1930s.2 In the face of the explosion of unemployment and poverty, which will probably accompany us throughout

La Civiltà Cattolica, En. Ed. Vol. 4, no. 07 art. 2, 0620: 10.32009/22072446.0720.2

1.Francis, Letter to the People’s Movements (w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/ letters/2020/documents/papa-francesco_20200412_lettera-movimentipopolari. html), April 12, 2020. 2.See G. Giraud, “Starting anew after the Covid-19 Emergency”, Civ. Catt. En. April, 2020, https://www.laciviltacattolica.com/starting-anew-after-the- covid-19-emergency/ A UNIVERSAL WAGE: AN URGENT SOCIAL DEBATE the 2020s, even in much of Europe and the United States, could this “universal basic wage” be considered one of the solutions to help us get out of the deflationary trap? Could it also help solve the huge challenge of global poverty?

A theological issue The main problem posed by the Letter of the Bishop of Rome is the recognition of the brothers and sisters of the popular movements and those for whom they work: “I know that you almost never receive the recognition that you deserve, because you are truly invisible to the system. Market solutions do not reach the peripheries, and State protection is hardly visible there.”3 Francis invites us to combat the invisibility of these “social poets,” by directing towards them 14 the same attentive gaze Christ directed to the widow who discreetly made her offering to the temple treasury (cf.Mark 12:38-44). This challenge is both spiritual and political. It certainly requires each one of us to change the way we look at the world, and it also requires a reform of the social structures that produce and maintain the invisibility of those who live on the periphery of our societies.4 The possibility of being visible in public space is not based exclusively on individual performance, but depends on the social rules that legitimize and improve our daily life or, on the contrary, make it precarious and undermine it. Visibility and invisibility are not natural qualities at all, but social ways of confirming or denying our styles of existence.5 Downgrading, marginalization and lack of work demean people to the point of erasing them, excluding them from all forms of participation; the employed,

3.Francis, Letter to the People’s Movements, op. cit. 4.This challenge, for example, is at the heart of the reflections of Axel Honneth, Paul Ricoeur and Judith Butler. Cfr A. Honneth, La lutte pour la reconnaissance, Paris, Cerf, 2000; P. Ricoeur, “Parcours de la reconnaissance”, in Mondes en développement, Paris, Stock, 2004; J.P. Butler, Giving an Account of Oneself, New York City, Fordham University Press, 2005. 5.G. Le Blanc, L’invisibilité sociale, Paris, PUF, 2009. This is also the theme of the beautiful film Les invisibles, made by French director Louis-Julien Petit in 2019. GAËL GIRAUD, SJ

the precarious, the excluded, the unemployed, the widow, the widower, the orphan, the refugee, the homeless, the patient are heard less and less, and are becoming increasingly invisible. What reforms of our institutions can we implement to dispel the invisibility to which those on the peripheries of our societies are relegated, sometimes even within the Church? As Francis pointed out in an interview recently published by La Civiltà Cattolica, the Holy Spirit “deinstitutionalizes” what in the Church no longer needs to be and “institutionalizes” the future.6 It must be said immediately that this creative disintegration bythe Spirit cannot be limited to ecclesial institutions, if only because these have not been developed in abstracto but are still situated within a specific society and in history. The spiritual tension between “disorder” and “harmony” that Francis discerns, 15 therefore, runs through all our institutions.7 Whether to reform them is a theological question, even when it comes to secular institutions such as those charged with determining the income of citizens.

Minimum wage or universal income? It is within the horizon of this spiritual and political situation that we have the proposal of a universal remuneration. But is it a minimum wage reserved for those who have a job, or a universal income for all, without conditions? For economists expert in these distinctions, the pope’s formulation is ambiguous. For example, in the eyes of French trade unionist Joseph Thouvenel, secretary of the French Confederation of Christian Workers, Francis’ remarks cannot be interpreted as an excuse for “those who idle”8 but can only be an allusion to the theory of the “just wage,” formalized by Thomas Aquinas and then taken up by Leo XIII in his encyclical

6.See A. Ivereigh, “Pope Francis says pandemic can be a ‘place of conversion’”, on the website of The Tablet, https://www.thetablet.co.uk/features/2/17845/ pope-francis-says-pandemic-can-be-a-place-of-conversion 7.This statement is central to the theology of C. Theobald, Le christianisme comme style. Une manière de faire de la théologie en postmodernité, vol. 1, Paris, Cerf, 2007. 8.Cfr J. Thouvenel, “Le revenu universel, meilleur ennemi des travailleurs”, in Vale u rs (https://bit.ly/2Lw3ckZ), April 18, 2020. A UNIVERSAL WAGE: AN URGENT SOCIAL DEBATE

Rerum Novarum (1891). In this case, the pope’s proposal would be tantamount to establishing a guaranteed minimum wage. In fact, the current globalization of the job market implies that the rules that make it feasible to avoid all possible distortions are also global, otherwise imposing a minimum wage in one country or another will only provide an incentive for companies to relocate their activities elsewhere. Several economists, including Thomas Palley,9 have proposed a minimum wage equal to 50 percent of the median wage of all the countries of the planet. In Italy, this would be equivalent to setting a minimum monthly salary of about 1,860 euros (instead of the current 500). A quarter of the Italian workforce currently receives a salary below this amount, and this salary is likely to increase in the coming years. Contrary to what is usually said, 16 this would not cause an explosion in unemployment,10 and would lead to fairly small increases in production costs.11 On the other hand it would change the lives of many “working poor,” including those in Germany. However, the list of beneficiaries of the universal basic wage to which Pope Francis refers goes beyond the category of wage- earners in the strict sense: “street vendors, gatherers, those who work at carnival times, small farmers, construction workers, dressmakers, the different varieties of caregivers: you who are not part of the regular workforce, working on your own or in the grassroots economy, you who have no steady income to get you through this hard time.”12 The various translations of the Pope’s letter suggest that the term “salary” cannot be interpreted strictly. Various European languages refer to salaire, salarios, salário and wage, but also to Grundeinkommen and retribuzione.

9.See T. Palley, “A Global Minimum Wage System”, in FT Economists’ Forum (http://thomaspalley.com/?p=182), July 18, 2011. 10.Cf. J. Schmitt, Why Does the Minimum Wage Have No Discernible Effect on Employment? (https://bit.ly/360t5CZ), Washington, Center for Economics and Policy Research, February 2013. 11.Especially because the risks of inflationary spirals in the context of deflation in the West are zero, unless the cost of raw materials explodes due to the disruption of certain supply chains caused by the pandemic. Inflation, therefore, would not be a consequence of labor costs. 12.Francis, Letter to the popular movements, op. cit. GAËL GIRAUD, SJ

Referring to those who must come out of invisibility, he said: “I think of the sick, I think of the elderly. They never appear in the news, nor do small farmers and their families who work hard to produce healthy food without destroying nature, without hoarding, without exploiting people’s needs.”13 To whom, then, is the pope’s proposal addressed? To all the “workers.” Does a housewife, for example, whose work, since it is not on the market and is never taken into account in the calculation of the GDP, provides a “working” service? Who are these workers if they are not recognized by a status that qualifies them as such? It is precisely in their invisibility that Francis wants to solve the problem. We believe that the answer lies in the “invisibles” themselves. Francis writes: “Our civilization [...] 17 needs to downshift, take stock, and renew itself. You are the 14 indispensable builders of this change that can no longer be put off.” And would it not be the task of these undervalued workers to define the dimensions of that “universal wage” that Francis asks for? So that “universal access to those three Ts that you defend: Trabajo (work), Techo (housing), and Tierra (land and food)”15 is guaranteed to them in the conditions they themselves consider most appropriate? After all, the debates that revolve around the definition of a minimum wage or universal income are mainly conducted by those who are at the center of society. It is undoubtedly time to give a voice to the voiceless, so that they themselves can help decide what meaning should be given to a “universal wage,” rather than continue suffering the injustice of definitions and standards imposed from the center. It is this inversion of perspective – from the center to the periphery – that guides, for example, the ATD Fourth World movement and the thinking of Father Joseph Wresinski.16 This change of perspective is not unrelated to the approach of some economists. It underpins, for example, the construction

13.Ibid. 14.Ibid. Our italics. 15.Ibid. 16.See G. Mucci, “Joseph Wresinski. Un costruttore sociale”, in Civ. Catt. 1996 I 436-445. A UNIVERSAL WAGE: AN URGENT SOCIAL DEBATE of statistical indicators on a participatory basis, such as the Barometer of Inequality and Poverty (BIP 40), carried out in France in 2002 by and with ordinary citizens.17

Utopia or prophetic reform? The French Movement for a Basic Income is therefore justified in cautiously concluding that the pope is “approaching the cause of universal income.”18 We should understand that if he only “approaches” it, he does so not out of shyness, but because it is up to the same voiceless people to decide what they want for themselves. Respect for the dignity of people demands this. The interpretation that we propose here implies that it is possible that the “universal wage” to which Francis alludes may 18 indeed be understood as “universal income” in the ordinary sense of the term if the “invisibles” of our peripheries so decide. There are five criteria normally used to define universal income: 1. a periodic payment, unlike the one-off cheque of $900 that the Australian government sent to its citizens in 2009 to overcome the consequences of the financial crisis; or that of $1,000 that the Trump administration has just given to American families19; 2. a monetary transfer, i.e. not in kind, which offers everyone the freedom to do what they want with their money, but presupposes, for example, the opening of a bank account, which is not usual for many of the poorest people; 3. a personalized contribution: payment is made on an individual basis and not, for example, on a family tax basis; 4. universal: not subject to any particular requirements; 5. unconditional: payment is not covered by any obligation on the part of the beneficiary, in particular the obligation to seek employment. Some statistics from the big picture are useful. The World Bank has identified extreme poverty as $1.90 per day pay, with

17.See https://bit.ly/3cvlxuB 18.G. Normand, “Le Pape François s’approche de la cause du revenu universel”, in revenudebase.info (https://bit.ly/3btqVNA), April 16, 2020. 19.These are initiatives that would be welcome in Europe today. GAËL GIRAUD, SJ

purchasing power parity. It is a widely shared opinion among economic researchers that this convention largely underestimates the real needs of a healthy human being, capable of leading a decent life. A minimum income of $7.40 per day seems much more reasonable.20 In 2018, more than 4.2 billion people (60 percent of the world’s population) were still living below this threshold, and this number will increase significantly in the coming months due to the catastrophic consequences of the lockdown. What annual income stream would be needed to enable these people to live above this threshold? Without going into the details of purchasing power parity calculations, we can answer that it would cost less than US$13 trillion. This may seem to some people a considerable figure: it is close to China’s nominal 19 GDP in 2018. However, a study by the NGO Oxfam21 shows that in the same year, 1 percent of the richest individuals on the planet received an annual income of 56 trillion dollars (equal to 80 percent of world GDP). If we only “took” a quarter of that income, it would be enough to finance a basic income of $7.40 a day (and even more) for that part of humanity currently deprived of it. After the “withdrawal,” the highest percentile of these super-rich people would still have an average of $47,500 of monthly income per person; this should be enough to allow them to continue to lead a “dignified” life. We are not claiming that such a “levy” would be politically easy to implement. However, these simple figures remind us that, contrary to a common belief, the problem of financing a basic income is not “lack of resources.” Similarly, if according to United Nations estimates, 820 million people still suffer from hunger in the world – and this number will unfortunately increase in the coming months due to the current emergency

20.Cfr D. Woodward, “Incrementum ad Absurdum: Global Growth, Inequality and Poverty Eradication in a Carbon-Constrained World”, in Wo rld Social and Economic Review (https://bit.ly/2WVytTQ), February 9, 2015. 21.Cfr Oxfam, Reward work, not wealth (https://oi-files-d8-prod.s3.eu- west-2.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/file_attachments/bp-reward-work-not- wealth-220118-en.pdf), January 2018. A UNIVERSAL WAGE: AN URGENT SOCIAL DEBATE situation – it is not because the biomass produced by the planet is unable to feed humanity; it is a political and ethical problem of wealth distribution. The neo-liberal imagery of scarcity, which easily leads us to think that a generous proposal is impossible, is misleading. We live on an overabundant planet, though threatened by an ecological crisis, and in a very rich world economy, though at risk of becoming considerably poorer due to lockdown and confinement.

The two forms of universal income To go further in examining their concrete feasibility, we must distinguish at least two forms of “universal income”: the first, we could call “right-wing,” inspired by criteria of economic 20 efficiency; the other “left-wing,” oriented by the desire for social justice. This elementary distinction, however, immediately forces us to move away from facile dichotomies: universal income is neither right-wing nor left-wing, but transcends our traditional political categories. The first type of basic income has its origins in the work of Chicago economist Milton Friedman22 and is designed to replace all other types of social transfers, making the introduction of a minimum wage unnecessary. Its promoters are hoping for further “flexibilization” of the labor market and a reduction in public spending on solidarity, or even a complete abandonment by the state of its decision-making role on citizens’ earned income. Charity, “more adaptable and flexible” than the welfare state, Friedman said, would thus regain a prominent place in the fight against poverty. Those who contest this proposal argue that it would be tantamount to guaranteeing a minimum subsistence income

22.See M. Friedman, Capitalism and Freedom, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1963; Id., “The Case for the Negative Income Tax: A View from the Right”, in Proceedings of the National Symposium on Guaranteed Income, Washington, D.C., U.S. Chamber of Commerce, December 9, 1966. The proposal was immediately accepted by Keynesian economists, indicating its ambivalence from the beginning: see J. Tobin - J. A. Pechman - P. M. Mieszkowski, “Is a negative income tax practical?”, in The Yale Law Journal, vol. 77/1, November 1967. GAËL GIRAUD, SJ

that enslaves the “reserve army” of citizens, who are forced to take on any remunerated work in order to improve their ordinary living conditions. It is undoubtedly this kind of concern that fuels the rejection of universal income by a certain part of the trade union world. Regardless of the political instrumentalization that can be made with regard to basic income, it is undeniable, that its strength lies in its simplicity. : The absence of any conditions makes it possible to short-circuit the possible ineffectiveness of the administrative procedures necessary to identify the beneficiaries of traditional social transfers, who, as we know, too often for this reason do not apply for what they would be entitled to. As a result, the weaker the public administration of a country or the more cumbersome or even non-existent the social transfer 21 system, the more relevant the option of a universal income becomes. This is why, whatever their political alignment, several economists recommend the implementation of such an income in most countries of the globalized South.23 The second type of universal income has been defended, at least since 1986, by Guy Standing, one of the founders of the Basic Income Earth Network (Bien).24 Unlike the first type, this would be a supplementary income, and therefore, not an alternative to the already active social transfers, where they exist. It would therefore be an excellent means to solve the growing problems of financial insecurity of the middle class and the working classes and, above all, it would make another kind of employment relationship possible. Inhuman working conditions in some countries – of which the Rana Plaza tragedy in Bangladesh in 2013 has become a symbol – is obviously due to the need, for those who have no alternative, to be hired under any conditions in order to survive. But even in rich countries, a universal income of this kind would certainly mean the end of so-called “bullshit jobs,”25 which are those of a growing

23.Cfr M. Ghatak - F. Maniquet, “Universal Basic Income: Some Theoretical Aspects”, in Annual Review of Economics 11 (2019) 895-928. 24.See https://basicincome.org/; see also Standing’s speech at the Davos Forum in 2017 at https://bit.ly/3buxu2f. 25.Cfr D. Graeber, Bullshit Jobs: A Theory, New York, Simon & Schuster, 2018. A UNIVERSAL WAGE: AN URGENT SOCIAL DEBATE number of employees in our public administrations and private companies: If I can afford to live without working, why should I accept a job that is socially useless and makes me angry? Such an instrument would therefore radically reverse the terms of negotiation implicit in any employment relationship, whether formalized by a contract or not. Of course, strengthening the bargaining power of workers would certainly lead to a reduction in the share of capital income in the added value of an economy and an increase in the share of labor income. This would correct the reverse trend that has been going on for 40 years at the expense of the vast majority of us. Since the end of the economic boom after World War II, and in most of the previously industrialized countries, the share of labor income has fallen from 70-80 percent of GDP to 60 percent. 22 The virtues attributed to universal income by its progressive defenders are often questioned by their opponents. Would such an income not provide an excuse for no longer working? Far from strengthening social ties, would it not cause the dissolution of human relations? Behind these questions are two radically opposed political philosophies: on the one hand, that of Thomas Hobbes for whom each person is an atom, even a wolf, a solitary being who engages in relationships with others only out of self-interest; on the other, that of the relational anthropology that belongs to the great Christian tradition.26 In this second perspective, it is only against the background of the constitutive social relations of humanity as such that the search for my particular interest can take place. Is it possible to resolve this debate with the help of what we observe empirically? Experiments with basic income have been underway in various countries since 2010. They testify to the growing interest in this measure even before the pandemic,27 but they have revealed, at times, a certain lack of ambition on the part of governments and the vehemence of the political

26.Cfr C. Theobald, Selon l’Esprit de sainteté. Genèse d’une théologie systématique, Paris, Cerf, 2015. 27. See, for example, the report commissioned by Scotland: A. Painter - J. Cooke - I. Burbidge - A. Ahmed, A Basic Income for Scotland (https://bit. ly/3fPbBxW), May 2019. GAËL GIRAUD, SJ

debate that accompanies such experiences. Although these were projects of limited scope, many were interrupted ahead of time. In Canada, the Ontario Basic Income Pilot Project, launched in 2018 to test the impact of basic income on 4,000 Canadians, was canceled after a few months by the newly elected Conservative Party. The goal was to test the effect of basic income on food security, stress and anxiety, health – including mental health – housing, education and job participation.28 One may ask: if it is so obvious that a universal income would be harmful to everyone, why not let the experiment prove it? In fact, experiments with a minimum wage (or its increase) have very often shown the opposite of what its opponents predicted, namely, a generalized increase in wages and the number of hours worked, and a reduction in unemployment.29 Perhaps there are 23 some who fear that it can be shown that a basic income would benefit the majority? In 2014, an experiment in India set itself the goal of testing universal income as a means of introducing liquidity into environments where monetary exchange is limited. The conclusions of this experiment, which could have been conducted to its conclusion, are nuanced, but extremely positive. They suggest that, because of its social consequences, the economic “value” of universal income far exceeds the nominal amount allocated to each recipient.30 Finally, numerous money transfer experiments have proved fruitful in Namibia, India and a dozen countries in the South of the world, to the point that, after decades of sarcasm, several analysts now see it as “the key to development.”31

28. Concerning the Ontario Basic Income Pilot Project, see https://bit. ly/2y4yUD2. 29. Cfr P. Constant, “New UW Report Finds Seattle’s Minimum Wage Is Great for Workers and Businesses”, in Civic Skunk Works (https://bit. ly/3bwDYxN), July 22, 2016. 30. Cfr G. Standing, “Why Basic Income’s Emancipatory Value Exceeds Its Monetary Value”, in Basic Income Studies 10 (2015/2) (https://bit.ly/3dJvlkO). 31. Cfr Oxfam, “‘Just Give Money to the Poor: the Development Revolution from the Global South’, an excellent overview of cash transfers” (https://bit. ly/2yWeVa0), May 24, 2010. A UNIVERSAL WAGE: AN URGENT SOCIAL DEBATE

Common goods versus privatization of the world The experiment conducted in Alaska since 1982 deserves special mention. Every year, a fraction of the oil dividends are distributed to residents, unconditionally and on an individual basis. The amounts – between 1,000 and 2,000 dollars a year, depending on the period32 – are in the order of magnitude of the poverty line of 7.4 dollars a day mentioned above. These amounts are small, of course, considering the average standard of living in this American state. But the most interesting thing is the principle used by the State of Alaska to justify them: it is compensation for the right to exploit a common good, oil, which actually belongs to all of the residents. To understand the meaning of this original way of financing a universal income, we need to take a step back. In 24 1217, the Charter of the Forest gave English farmers the right to enjoy the commons – forests, pastures, mountain pastures, rivers – in order to stock up on wood, water and feed their herds, etc. England formalized a right which was perceived by most people as natural and which had already been recognized by Roman law as res communis, placed by the Justinian Code at the top of the hierarchy of goods, with private property occupying the last place. Between the as we know, the English nobility promoted the enclosure movement to delimit the commons and then decree that from that moment on these enclosures were the exclusive property of the local lord. By depriving the poor peasants of any form of subsistence, this movement helped to push them toward the cities, desperately seeking the means to survive. Without this rural exodus, the Industrial Revolution would never have occurred. So, from the beginning, it was the privatization of common goods that produced and encouraged those inhumane forms of paid work that we have known for three centuries.33

32. Cfr T. J. Isenberg, “What a New Survey from Alaska Can Teach Us about Public Support for Basic Income”, in Economic Security Project (https://bit. ly/369xpjH), June 28, 2017. 33. Cfr G. Giraud, Composer un Monde en commun, une “théologie politique” de l’ Anthropocène, Paris, Seuil, forthcoming. GAËL GIRAUD, SJ

An even partially universal basic income would correct this perverse state of affairs. Is it possible that such an instrument is somehow articulated through the omnipotence of privatization, which today translates into a second enclosure movement, affecting the new commons, such as the goods and services of the ecosystem, the human genome, intellectual property, artistic production and potentially all human activities? The Alaska example provides a precedent for a positive response. Why not imagine that a fraction of the income from the exploitation of our global commons is redistributed to finance a basic income? Would this not be a concrete and effective way to honor the universal destination of goods, dear to the Fathers of the Church and the Church’s social doctrine? For example, the atmosphere is certainly a common good 25 throughout the world. A global carbon tax – strongly supported by the Stern-Stiglitz Commission34 – of 120 euros per ton of CO2 produced,35 applied to the 100 multinationals responsible for 70 percent of emissions, would generate a revenue of 3.1 trillion euros per year. Extended to all other types of emissions, this taxation would provide 4.43 trillion euros. Managed by an international fund, this revenue36 could be distributed to people living below the poverty line.37 It could be argued that this is not enough to lift humanity out of extreme poverty. It does not matter: a tax of 27 percent on the USD 32 trillion currently hidden in tax havens would be enough to supplement what is lacking, so that everyone can live on more than USD 7.4 a day. Income from ownership of land, forests or even waste – a “common evil” – could also be subject to global taxation.

34. Cfr Carbon Pricing Leadership Coalition, Report Of The High-Level Commission On Carbon Prices (https://bit.ly/2WP9fq4), May 29, 2017. 35. This is the current level of carbon tax applied in Sweden. 36. One could imagine supervision by the United Nations, provided that this body, now completely paralyzed by the pandemic, isreformed to give full space to the emerging countries of the South. 37. The proposal to finance a partial basic income from a carbon tax was put forward by two former Republican Secretaries of State and the US Secretary of the Treasury, Henry Paulson. See M. Howard, “Conservative Carbon Dividend Proposal is a Welcome Development for Introduction of Partial Basic Income”, in Basic Income News (https://bit.ly/3cx5Qmt), February 11, 2017. A UNIVERSAL WAGE: AN URGENT SOCIAL DEBATE

Whichever option is chosen, it must be done after consulting all interested parties. Many other questions arise about the recipients of a basic income, should it be only partially universal. Should we, for example, reserve it for the under-25s, since it can be assumed that most of them will have considerable difficulties in finding work in Europe in the coming years? No truly fruitful collective discernment can be made on these fundamental issues until those of us who are relegated to the peripheries of our society can take an active part in them. As Francis wrote in his Letter to the Workers of the People’s Movements: “Your resilience helps me, challenges me, and teaches me a great deal.”38

26

38. Francis, Letter to the People’s Movements, op. cit. Against Religious Nationalism

Joseph Lobo, SJ

In some countries a form of religious-cultural nationalism is back in vogue. Religion is exploited both to obtain popular support and to launch a political message that is identified with people’s loyalty and devotion to a nation.1 It is taken for 27 granted that people have in religion a common identity, origin and history, and that these support an ideological, cultural and religious homogeneity that is strengthened by geopolitical boundaries. In reality, in today’s globalized world, there is no geographical entity that can be defined as a “nation” that has within it a single homogeneous identity from a linguistic or religious point of view, or indeed from any other point of view. Therefore, radical nationalism is only possible if it eliminates diversity. It follows that a liberating deconstruction of nationalism is more necessary than ever. Let us be clear: nationalism should never be confused with patriotism. In fact, while the “patriot is proud of his country for what it does, the nationalist is proud of his country no matter what it does; the first creates a feeling of responsibility while the second, blind arrogance that leads to war.”2

La Civiltà Cattolica, En. Ed. Vol. 4, no. 07 art. 3, 0620: 10.32009/22072446.0720.3

1.See A. Spadaro - M. Figueroa, “Evangelical Fundamentalism and Catholic Fundamentalism A Surprising Ecumenism”, in Civ. Catt. 2017 https://www. laciviltacattolica.com/evangelical-fundamentalism-and-catholic-integralism- in-the-usa-a-surprising-ecumenism/ 2.S. J. Harris, Strictly Personal, Washington D.C., H. Regnery Co, 1953. AGAINST RELIGIOUS NATIONALISM

The relevance of a theological response to nationalism What are the contours of a nationalism that gains mythical status? Effective nationalistic narratives usually mythicize history and historicize mythologies with great success. Let us take the following passage by Johann Dräseke, written in Bremen in 1813, as an example: “All temples, all schools, all city halls, all work places, all cottages, all hearths must become armouries for the defence of our people against things strange and wicked. Heaven and earth must unite themselves in Germany. The church must become a state in order to gain power and the state must become a church in order to be the Kingdom of God. Only when we become devout in this sense, and become united in such devotion, and become strong in such unity, will 3 we never again have to bear a yoke.” 28 Even a national sentiment as secular in some ways as that of the United States has cloaked itself in “religious” guise, with a kind of divinization of the founding fathers and a narrative centered on the special role and favor given by God to that people. In the period following the Second World War, the exaltation of the American way of life led to the apotheosis of national life, the equivalence of national values and religion, the divinization of national heroes and the transformation of national history into Heilsgeschichte (“History of Salvation”).4 As reported in La Civiltà Cattolica, some fundamentalist religious communities “consider the United States a nation blessed by God, and do not hesitate to base the economic growth of the country on a literal adherence to the Bible. Within this narrative, whatever pushes toward conflict is not off limits.” On the contrary, “often war itself is assimilated to the heroic conquests of the ‘Lord of Hosts’ of Gideon and David. In this Manichaean vision, belligerence can acquire

3.Quoted in A. J. Hoover, “The Dangers of Religious Nationalism: A German Example”, in Restoration Quarterly 29 (1987/2) 94. 4.W. Herberg, Protestant, Catholic, Jew: An Essay in American Religious Sociology, Garden City (NY), Doubleday, 1955, especially chapter XI. The reference is taken from G. R. McDermott, “Poverty, Patriotism, And National Covenant: Jonathan Edwards And Public Life”, in Journal of Religious Ethics 31 (2003/2) 231. JOSEPH LOBO, SJ

a theological justification and there are pastors who seek a biblical foundation for it, using scriptural texts out of context.”5 An appropriate response to nationalism is an authentically religious response, that is, a response that, through theology, grasps the essence of religious discourse itself, deconstructing narratives and practices that threaten to be destructive rather than constructive, precisely like those of nationalism. Theology is not only important, but essential in deconstructing so many dangerous narratives and practices that dehumanize individuals and communities, such as the rhetoric and practice of religious- cultural nationalism. Pope Francis has spoken about the role of religions in the face of today’s dangers: “Religions therefore have an 29 educational task: to help bring out the best in each person.” This is the opposite of “the rigid and fundamentalist reactions on the part of those who, through violent words and deeds, seek to impose extreme and radical attitudes which are furthest from the living God.”6

The universal saving will of God The Old Testament texts are quite ambiguous with regard to nationalism. On the one hand, they support Israel’s religious-cultural exclusivism and its related feeling of being favored by God; on the other, they depict the vision of God’s universal love for all peoples. That is, on the one hand, we have the so-called “trajectory of royal consolidation,” aimed at fostering, defending and justifying the role of the Jewish ruling class and its theology. On the other hand, we have the so-called “trajectory of prophetic liberation,” characterized by authentic criticism of the idolatrous lifestyle of the rulers, with the prediction of judgment, punishment and a subsequent reconstruction of Judah as the sign of a universal providence of God.

5.A. Spadaro - M. Figueroa, “Evangelical Fundamentalism...”, op. cit. 6.Francis, Interreligious meeting with the Sheikh of the Muslims of the Caucasus and representatives of other religious communities in the country, Heydar Aliyev Mosque - Baku, October 2, 2016. AGAINST RELIGIOUS NATIONALISM

In fact, the prophets relativize Israel’s exclusive proximity to God: “Are you not like the Ethiopians to me, O people of Israel? says the Lord. Did I not bring Israel up from the land of Egypt, and the Philistines from Caphtor and the Arameans from Kir?” (Amos 9:7), thus deploring a purely exclusive vision, with the repeated evocation of the “mixture of races” that characterizes Jewish history,7 of the pagan king Cyrus who is “the chosen one of the Lord” (Isa 45:1), of King Nebuchadnezzar who is “the servant of the Lord” (Jer 27:6), and of God, who is not God of his people “only from nearby, [...] but also from afar” (Jer 23:23). Reading these texts within an overall picture of justice and God’s love as they are revealed by the Christ event leads to the unequivocal denunciation of all oppression and exploitation of any human being in any circumstance. Any vision that is not set 30 at this height certainly goes against God’s universal salvific will.

The ‘neighbor’ instead of nationalism It is enlightening to consider the parable of the Good Samaritan (cf. Luke 10:25-37). Its impact comes from the prominence given to a Samaritan instead of to a (good) Jew. While criticizing the priest and the Levite for their non-liberating religiosity, the parable could have exalted any poor Jew. Why does it exalt a Samaritan instead? The new category, that of the “neighbor,” is an antidote to nationalist self-justification. The neighbor does not coincide with the co-religionist and the compatriot. The parable of the Good Samaritan debunks the myth of a nationalism that aims to build a nation on the rubble of some of its citizens and neighbors. The commitment to become anyone’s neighbor, as extolled in the parable, demands concrete steps. Before a true and living neighbor, nationalism and hypocritical patriotism end up in oblivion and the concrete

7.Although the story of Ruth the Moabite and her Jewish mother-in-law Naomi is seen by many as an argument to infer an ideology inclusive of all peoples in God’s saving plan, some scholars, such as Benjamin Mangrum, use literary criticism to read in this story a “centripetal” vision, which affirms the inclusion of non-Jewish nations as the fulfillment of the restoration of Judah. See B. Mangrum, “Bringing ‘Fullness’ to Naomi: Centripetal Nationalism in The Book of Ruth”, in Horizons in Biblical Theology 33 (2011/1) 62-81. JOSEPH LOBO, SJ

truth of every human being created in the image and likeness of God emerges. The Easter event will then definitively mark the passage to a new People of God, whose members are reconciled in the blood of Christ regardless of their affiliations and cultures. As Saint Paul says, “our citizenship [...] is in heaven, and from there we are expecting a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ” (Phil 3:20). This “heavenly citizenship” transcends any sectarian and idolatrous citizenship. Moreover, the love of one’s neighbor is really the love of the “other,” in contrast to “love of oneself or one’s fellow” sustained by nationalism, because the latter is “love for me”8 a narcissistic self-love, which Christianity cannot condone. Rightly, therefore, “the parable of the Good Samaritan establishes the priority not of my people or my nation, but of 31 the needy, whoever and wherever they may be. By contrast, the factiousness of the nationalist arbitrarily favors those who before God have no special privileges or conditions. Jesus teaches a radical love that recognizes the equal value of every person created in God’s image, and forbids special treatment for me and mine.”9

From ideology to idolatry? Otto Dibelius, a famous German evangelical preacher, proclaimed during the First World War: “Whoever fights for his nationality and gives everything for it complies with God’s command. [...] Whoever seeks to promote international culture at the expense of the nation is guilty of treason against humanity; against him the curse of God is raised. [...] He who wants to be a Christian must esteem his nation more than anything else in the world.”10 Such an exaltation of a nation makes nationalism a religion and commitment to a nation coincide with religious faith, reducing religion to a nationalist ideology.11

8.This is the thought of Kierkegaard. Cfr S. Backhouse, “Patriotism, Nationhood and Neighborhood”, in Modern Believing 53 (2012) 404. 9.T. D. Kennedy, “Patriotism and Empire”, in Wo rd & Wo rld 25 (2005/2) 119. 10.Quoted in A. J. Hoover, “The Dangers of Religious Nationalism…”, op. cit., 88f. 11.Cfr J. M. Thomas, “The resurgence of religious nationalism”, in Encounter 47 (1986/2) 133. AGAINST RELIGIOUS NATIONALISM

Idolatry is the cult rendered to something other than divinity. It exploits religion. All religions in the world, without exception, at some point in their history have given in to such processes. Christianity has not been exempt from this, sometimes allowing itself to be exploited by interests that had little or nothing to do with the genuineness of the Gospel message. (Just think of the colonialist period). Every time Islamic fundamentalists use religion to perpetrate and justify violence and corruption, they exploit Islam. The current dynamics of Hindutva have done the same to Hinduism.12 Buddhism in Sri Lanka risks being prey to radicalized monks. All this is in direct contrast to the fundamental liberating principles of religions. Today, however strongly criticized, in any tendency to essentialize a religious tradition in an 32 idealized form, at least some transcendent and humanizing dimensions can be identified. These can be very liberating for a religious tradition and lay bare the contrast between it and its debased forms. Dietrich Bonhoeffer pointed out that Nazism, when it claimed to be the guardian of German culture, was exploiting the great legacy of Germanism.13 Every nationalism does the same. The true adversary of “we” – the nation with a sectarian identity – is not the “other” as such, but the “we” unleashed against itself.

‘Public exegesis’ and ‘public theologies’ The religious-cultural nationalism we are discussing is a “public” discourse. That is, its plausibility is based on public acts such as its narratives, metaphors, exegesis, “rituals,” as well as a language that is directly understandable by the public, concerned with real problems of everyday life, on which religious-cultural nationalism is projected as a panacea. In these terms, it converts many euphoric followers who would not hesitate to commit heinous actions “for the good of

12.See G. Sale, “L’India di Modi: tra tradizionalismo induista e coronavirus”, in Civ. Catt. 2020 II 457-470. 13.Cfr L. Rasmussen, “Patriotism lived: lessons from Bonhoeffer”, in Christianity and Crisis 45 (1985) 250. JOSEPH LOBO, SJ

the nation” in clear violation of traditions and sacred texts, which are interpreted as the opposite of their central message . Pastor Arden Buchholz, for example, promoted a typical nationalistic spirit when he preached in Germany during the First World War: “This conflict is a time of Pentecost for our nation, a time full of Pentecostal energy for a Pentecostal work. [...] May this German Pentecost enter deep into us, and remain in us, and have a great effect on our nation.”14 Likewise, in an attempt to silence the protests against the war that had arisen in the United States at the time of the First World War, Ulysses Grant Wilkinson wrote: “Must we still suffer those who cry: ‘Peace when there is no peace’ [a distortion of Jer 8:11]. [...] Shall we cast our pearls to hogs, or longer give (what Christ forbids), ‘things holy to the dogs?’”15 33 If distortions such as these are to be effectively countered, it is necessary that the exegesis and theology of the different religions, as well as being academically founded, be in the public domain.16 In other words, they must free themselves from the grip of elitism, and they must be allowed to emerge and play a role in the public domain, so that they become socially intelligible and meaningful both in their methodological modalities and in the issues they focus on. Moreover, religious-cultural nationalism tends to operate a sort of brainwashing in those who profess it, whereby the history of the nation is seen as a sort of Heilsgeschichte, a history of God’s salvation of chosen people. Although such interpretations of national history may appear very liberating, an exclusivist nationalistic vision justifies the “nation” and its legitimate citizens in whatever they do and leaves no room

14.A. Buchholz, Glaube ist Kraft!, Stuttgart 1917, 144; 154; quoted in A. J. Hoover, “The Dangers of Religious Nationalism…”, op. cit., 91. 15.U. G. Wilkinson, The Great Conflict, Comanche,, 1919, 83; quoted in M. W. Casey, “From Pacifism to Patriotism: “The Emergence of Civil Religion in The Churches of Christ During World War I”, in The Mennonite Quarterly Review 66 (1992) 386. 16.The concept of “public exegesis” and its relevance today are explained in J. Lobo, “When Public Faith Discords with Professional Exegesis...”, in K. H. Jose (ed.), Becoming Human - Becoming Christ, Bengaluru, ATC Publishers, 2018, 242-253. AGAINST RELIGIOUS NATIONALISM for self-criticism. In this key, Psalm 118:17 (“I shall not die, but I shall live and proclaim the works of the Lord”) during the First World War became for some German pastors a very useful text on which to build the feeling of certainty of divine protection against everything and everyone. The subsequent defeat of Germany created great dismay among them. The problem was solved by shifting the responsibility onto the Jews, the communists and the socialists, and many people became theological and pastoral adherents of Hitler’s projects.17 In fact, some German Christians could say of Adolf Hitler: “The most German of men, he is also the most pious, a Christian believer”; “He begins and concludes his daily commitments with prayer and has found the deepest source of his power in the Gospel.”18 Today we need to ask ourselves: Does the deity always side 34 with his worshippers, no matter what they do? Questions like this need to be asked on a public level about all religions.

A theological antidote Here then is our question: Can a theological answer be given to attempts to ratify religious-cultural nationalism? A response should focus on keeping alive the original manifestations of various religions, and thus the founding characteristic of their religious experience, which normally defines an identity in their adherents. The uniqueness of the respective original events should be affirmed for the sake of their liberating value. This is what Pope Francis discussed in some passages of the speech he gave on April 28, 2017, to the participants in the International Conference for Peace at the University of al-Azhar in Cairo: “Religion risks being absorbed into the administration of temporal affairs and tempted by the allure of worldly powers that in fact exploit it.” And he continued: “For all our need of the Absolute, it is essential that we reject any ‘absolutizing’ that would justify violence. For violence is the negation of every authentic religious expression.” And, in this context, he spoke

17.Cfr A. J. Hoover, “The Dangers of Religious Nationalism…”, op. cit., 92f. 18.J. A. Zabel, Nazism and the Pastors, Missoula, Scholars Press, 1976, 112; quoted in J. M. Thomas, “The resurgence of religious nationalism”, op. cit., 131. JOSEPH LOBO, SJ

out against the populisms that often use religion as a propaganda tool: “Demagogic populisms are on the rise. These certainly do not help to consolidate peace and stability; no incitement to violence will guarantee peace, and every unilateral action that does not promote constructive and shared processes is in reality a gift to the proponents of radicalism and violence.” The Christian idea of a plan for the fullness of time, to “gather up all things in Christ, things in heaven and things on earth” (Eph 1:10) does not impose a religious identity that absorbs all others, but rather suggests that different identities, such as that of Jews and Gentiles, male and female, slaves and free (cf. Gal 3:28), transcend themselves and reach a new collective identity, transformed as redeemed children of God, where “God is all in all” (1 15:28), something very different from universalizing 35 Cor a particular identity, as cultural nationalism proposes. Nationalist aspirations nurture themselves by creating hope in a future glorious nation that will replicate an imaginary golden past. Within such a nationalist aura, even the negative dimensions inherent in one’s own land are projected as “holier” or “better” than the positive factors of a foreign land.19 Even those who are victims of oppression need to create contrasting narratives of hope in order to keep their resistance alive. Saint Paul emphasizes how difficulties and persecution induce hope in those who suffer them (cf.Rom 5:3-5). The hope aroused by the exiled prophets certainly played a significant role in keeping the “exiles” alive and active during their exile. The speeches of great leaders such as Martin Luther King Jr. (I Have a Dream) remain immortal precisely because they are suffused with hope. And like speeches, rituals also create and nurture hope.

Nationalism and blind zeal Religious-cultural nationalism is marked by zeal, but this is not one of the fruits of the Holy Spirit (cf. Gal 5:22- 23). In reality, Paul calls a certain “zeal” for the Mosaic law “blindness” (cf. 2 Cor 4:4-6) and one of the “works of the

19.Cfr M. R. Wilson, “Zionism As Theology: An Evangelical Approach”, in Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 22 (1979) 31f. AGAINST RELIGIOUS NATIONALISM

20 flesh” (Gal 5:19-20). This is a very strong theological criticism of a nationalist spirit that has nothing to do with the true purpose of the law itself. Religious-cultural nationalism can be defined as “oppressive religiosity.” The fanaticism of religious-cultural nationalism, rather than pursuing a lasting peace for all, subverts true peace and keeps society divided between “us” and “them,” and with its strategies of violent propaganda cannot but consider coercion as a necessary means, and evaluate peace initiatives as dangerous because they are hostile to the exclusive strengthening of one’s own identity. Usually the strongest symbols of identity – such as religion, race, language, culture, ideology and so on – are used to maintain the gulf between “us” and “them.” The narrow and oppressive nationalist movements prosper by 36 building an “outsider” or “other” as a common enemy, making them a scapegoat, while the internal contradictions of the “we” are deliberately hidden. When Mahatma Gandhi fought the British, he was acutely aware of India’s internal contradictions.21 Consequently, before every satyagraha22 he fasted and prayed to free himself and his followers from anger, greed and other aspects of an inner slavery. For him, the personal integrity of everyone, especially the leaders, was of fundamental importance. Oppressive nationalism is used as an opium for the masses, so that they are not aware of the internal contradictions and lack of personal integrity of those who command them. “But it is a false patriotism,” says Guy Hershberger, “which, in the absence of better knowledge, places these men [the corrupt leaders] on pedestals of perfection, wraps their spirits in an aura of divinity and discredits any criticism that the historian might feel called upon to make of their seemingly immaculate people

20.Cfr D. Ortlund, “Zeal without knowledge: For What did Paul Criticize his Fellow Jews in Romans 10:2-3?”, in The Westminster Theological Journal 73 (2011) 37. 21.See M. K. Gandhi, Hind Swaraj: Or, Indian Home Rule, Ahmedabad, Navajivan Pub. House, 1989. 22.This is the method of political opposition advocated by Gandhi, based on non-violence and passive resistance. JOSEPH LOBO, SJ

and impeccable careers.”23 The internal contradictions, which a nationalist narrative tries to hide, are often the same evils, such as mass poverty, social injustice or corruption.

National repentance rather than nationalism It is here that true national repentance should supplant the nationalist spirit, which blinds people to such contradictions. A classic example is Abraham Lincoln’s appeal, fully aware of his country’s problems, he called on “good citizens” and “patriots” to “confess their [political] sins and transgressions.”24 Those affected by blind nationalism would not tolerate such an appeal; rather, they would brand such prophets as “anti-citizens,” inciting the crowd to kill them. The frequent attempts by nationalists to distort national 37 history are aimed at covering up national sins, as this text shows: “The prime essential of history-teaching to our children is to inculcate wholesome appreciation of the heroes, ideals, and achievements of our country’s past and to stimulate right aspirations as to its future. The teaching to American children of the revised and much-complained-of history text-books can have but one result, and that is to depreciate American patriotic thought and degrade national spirit.”25 Our theological response to religious-cultural nationalism should focus on “national repentance.” It is necessary to prevent nationalist discourse from spreading and becoming “common sense” in everyday life, thus shaping social intelligibility in terms of an exclusivist religious-cultural ideology, and making the institutions of democracy lose their democratic character. There is a need for cultural interventions capable of creating critical awareness in individuals and groups through

23.G. Hershberger, “False Patriotism - I”, in The Mennonite Quarterly Review, No. 1, 1927, 15. 24.A. Lincoln, “Speech in United States House of Representatives: The War with Mexico”, in Collected Works, vol.1, New Brunswick, Rutgers University Press, 1953-1955, 432; 433; 431; quoted in G. M. Simpson, “Hope in the Face of Empire: Failed Patriotism, Civil International Publicity, and Patriotic Peacebuilding”, in Wo rd & Wo rld 25 (2005/2) 136. 25.D. Hirshfield, Report on Investigation of Pro-British History Text-Books, New York, 1923, 13; quoted in G. Hershberger, “False Patriotism - I”, op. cit., 33 AGAINST RELIGIOUS NATIONALISM a multiplicity of ways: first, through educational responsibility in its various forms. People can be trained by means of education, catechesis, small group discussions, through pamphlets, articles, social media, posters, street performances and all channels of communication aimed at creating a critical and inventive mass consciousness.

Conclusion The Christian acknowledgement of God’s liberating intervention in human history through the Son highlights prophetic sensitivity to the divine pathos and the related protest against all that degrades the human and the cosmic. The Book of Revelation is a classic case in which this dynamic is applied “against the beast.” The Roman nationalist discourse 38 was supported by an idolatrous economy. Merchants and entrepreneurs had to bear the “mark of the beast” (i.e. participate in the cult of the emperor) in order to be allowed to “buy or sell” (Rev 13:17). We must always remember that “abusing the Bible for political purposes is as blasphemous an act as isolating it from the burning political and social issues of our time.”26 The religious-cultural nationalism of every age demands a theological response. Indeed, religion can reach the deepest levels of human reality and induce a transformation on both personal and structural levels. The ideologues of religious- cultural nationalism have always understood very well that the fundamental level of the human being is the religious one, because our openness to the infinite allows us to transcend our own selves, and therefore they have produced many martyrs for their causes, while torturing and killing other people. This can only be countered by a commitment born of even deeper and more authentic religious aspirations. Here are found the roots of the importance of the role of religion and theology.

26.Ibid. See V. Anselmo, “Religious Symbols and Political Exploitation. A biblical reflection”, in laciviltacattolica.com/religious-symbols-and-political- exploitation-a-biblical-reflection/; R. J. Z. Werblowsky, “Prophecy, The Land and The People”, in C. F. H. Henry (ed.), Prophecy in the Making, Carol Stream (IL), Creation House, 1971, 353; quoted in M. R. Wilson, “Zionism As Theology…”, op. cit., 40. John Paul II Communicator

Federico Lombardi, SJ

Karol Wojtyla was born on May 18, 1920. On the hundredth anniversary of his birth, memories and tributes have rightly multiplied for this great witness of faith, already raised to the honors of the altars. I wish to add a small voice to this great choir 39 by remembering with simplicity and emotion some experiences lived in his service in the Vatican communications field.

A confident vision of communication and the media John Paul II showed himself to be a great communicator from the very first moment of his pontificate, as soon as he appeared at the Loggia of the Blessings on the evening of October 16, 1978. I recall the famous, spontaneous words on the day of his election – “The cardinals have called a new bishop of Rome from a distant country... If I’m wrong you’ll correct me...” and his remarks during his first outings from the Vatican helped to break down barriers. The speech on the day of the inauguration of his pontificate – “Do not be afraid, open the doors, indeed, open wide the doors to Christ!” – made a deep impression for its expressiveness and the strength of his tone of voice. As far as relations with the media are concerned, it was above all the first press conference on the plane with journalists on the first international trip (in January 1979, to Mexico) that the new style of this pope emerged and consolidated his positive relationship with the press. Paul VI had also passed among the journalists to greet them on his trips, but there were no questions and answers. Who knows if John Paul II had gone among the journalists precisely to converse with them,

La Civiltà Cattolica, En. Ed. Vol. 4, no. 07 art. 4, 0620: 10.32009/22072446.0720.4 JOHN PAUL II COMMUNICATOR or if the interaction began by chance? In any case, while before it had not even come to mind to ask the pope questions, it subsequently became automatic. The personality of the new pope was so naturally inclined to a more direct and spontaneous relationship with the media. Perhaps the prolonged experience of a world without freedom of expression had given Karol Wojtyla a positive view of the reality of the media of the Free World, which he felt to be potential allies in his commitment to give voice to the expectations of the oppressed Churches and peoples that they would be liberated, which did indeed happen, contributing to an epochal historical change that remains one of the notable features of his pontificate. In any case, certainly, for those who were and still are accustomed to a traditional diffidence – or at 40 least restraint – among ecclesiastical and curial circles toward the media, John Paul II’s attitude was profoundly innovative. He can be defined as optimistic, more ready to see the positive possibilities than to fear the pitfalls that are certainly not lacking. In this he translated into his life the attitude manifested at the Second Vatican Council of dialogue with the contemporary world, with its encouraging vision of the reality of social communications, in particular in the Decree Inter Mirifica, which already with its very title – “Among the wonderful inventions of human ingenuity” – indicated its positive possibilities. John Paul II is the first to set the example of following the injunction, “Do not be afraid,” and can therefore be convincing when he says to people in the media, as he does to everyone: “Do not be afraid! Open the doors to Christ!” Showing sincere esteem for them and their work, he challenges those in the media to become better than they sometimes are. We are used to thinking often about the misuse of television and the media. But sometimes people also expect good things, and media workers who can interpret the expectations of ordinary people almost instinctively enable us to understand them and help us to respond to them. One example, taken from my experience of communications work with John Paul II is enough. A few days after September 11, throughout Europe a three-minute silence was observed at 12 noon in FEDERICO LOMBARDI, SJ

commemoration of the victims of the attack on the World Trade Center. In the morning the television agencies began to call the Vatican Television Center (CTV): “And what is the pope doing? Will we get pictures?” A simple note was sent to the pontifical apartments. At 12:15 p.m. images of the pope kneeling immersed in prayer in his chapel in Castelgandolfo were already being viewed around the world. Evidently the pope had already prayed for a long time that morning, without needing to be asked. But when he knew that people wanted to see him pray, sharing in the pain and anguish of humanity, he immediately made himself available. John Paul II was willing to listen to the demands that came from the world of the media if he recognized a sincere expectation for a human, spiritual and Gospel-inspired message. He immediately understood that for 41 people to see him pray would be a great comfort. There is a very significant fact about John Paul II’s relationship with the media, and in general with the world of communications. Within a couple of days of returning from every apostolic trip abroad, the three or four Vatican media officials who had been in the papal retinue were invited to a working lunch with the pope, together with the organizers – Father Tucci and Dr. Gasbarri – and with the monsignor of the Secretariat of State who had followed the international press review of the trip every day. The pope wanted to know what the echoes of the trip had been in the media; he wanted to reflect with his collaborators on what had been understood and what had not, to see whether or not his message had “reached” the general public. He did this every time, regularly, even after the hundredth trip, when he was old and ill and one would think he already understood how the media work. Of course it was a pleasant lunch, but it was also a challenging lunch. The pope knew very well what he was looking for in these kinds of meetings and he did not let the conversation deviate too much from the central topic. This says a lot about the relationship between John Paul II and the media, about his attention to them as a dimension of today’s reality, about his awareness that the media are an indispensable way to spread every message. It was a serene and JOHN PAUL II COMMUNICATOR humble attention that sought to understand and take note of the dynamics of communication in today’s world, without letting himself be frightened or conditioned by them. The pope knew well what he wanted and had to say, and he would certainly not change it out of fear, or out of love for the media, but he was not indifferent to whether what he wanted to say was understood or not. And even more than 25 years into his pontificate, right up to the end, up to the last journey, he strove to learn more, to let the media collaborate ever better with his mission.

‘Blessed is television!’ It is also certain that John Paul II saw the Church’s media, especially the Vatican media, as an important tool for carrying out the mission of evangelization. It is known that the 42 institutional media are often a serious economic burden; they cost money and bring in no revenue. Therefore many people do not always see them in a good light, or think that they need to be scaled down. John Paul II never reasoned in this way, and he has always been felt by Vatican media workers to be their strongest and most convinced supporter. If the previous popes had promoted the printed press and then radio, it was up to John Paul II to introduce television into the Vatican media, trying to catch up – let’s be honest! – on a certain level of delay. The foundation of the Vatican Television Center filled a gap that had made the Vatican completely dependent on the RAI (Italy’s Public Broadcaster), which, until 1983, had made up for the absence of this instrument among the media at the service of the pope’s ministry. While also considering the other media very important, it is right to observe that the very long pontificate of John Paul II coincided with the extraordinary development of television in the world. In a certain sense we can say that his was the first “television” pontificate, followed by Catholics and the peoples of the world through the medium of television. He was well aware of it. There is a precise episode that helps to understand it and that has deeply marked those who participated in it. It was the evening of March 15, 2003. In the Paul VI Hall there was a Papal Prayer Vigil with European university students, FEDERICO LOMBARDI, SJ

and the team of the Television Center was tightly squeezed into its small van, managing with their hearts in their mouths the two-way satellite connections with six different European cities, concerned that they would falter or not work properly. At one point the elderly pope spontaneously exclaimed: “This television is a wonderful institution! Now, as I find myself here in Rome, in this hall, I see the church of Saint Anne, in Krakow, which I know very well... and I see the students, who now have another cardinal, who lets himself be seen on television. So both of us can repeat: behold, a blessed institution, this television! And the young people of Krakow, through television, they applaud too!” These words metaphorically blew away the hearts of the CTV operators. It was a moment they would never forget. Yes, 43 the pope, thanks to their modest service, was able to take his first steps into a new media dimension of his ministry, not only to be seen and heard by half the world, but also to be able to dialogue with the faithful present in other places where he could not go physically, to interact with them, with a form of presence mediated by technology, but not without truth and intensity. How far would the pope’s service employ this route in the future? John Paul II foretold it and rejoiced. How many priests and religious today have the courage to say: “Blessed is television!”? That was truly prophetic. Many of us view horrible things on television and now social media too. And it is true that they do great harm. But John Paul II taught us to see beyond that too, to see the good things that are done and can be done and he challenged us to do them with such strength and enthusiasm that even these realities can be a blessing. The popes are great missionaries, great announcers of the faith to the world, and for this reason they have also been able to use the media. Already Pius XI with the radio was able to potentially enlarge the audience of his messages to the whole world. John Paul II, through radio and television, which multiplied the effectiveness of his apostolic pilgrimage, truly reached most of the globe. When he multiplied his greetings in the different idioms, when he wished people well at Christmas and Easter in over 60 languages, we realized that he felt – well beyond the colonnade of St. Peter’s Square – the presence of JOHN PAUL II COMMUNICATOR the universal community, a harmony with the entire family of peoples, which was made possible by the instruments of social communication.

The gift of languages, voice, gestures It is right to give an admiring testimony for the commitment that John Paul II dedicated to speaking the different languages of the peoples of the world as a sign of attention and respect for their culture. Certainly, he was favored in this by an uncommon natural gift, but he also dedicated considerable personal commitment to it. At Vatican Radio, where about forty different languages were spoken every day, we knew how often the pope used the different language sections for translations and to practice the speeches or greetings he wanted to make in different 44 languages, even those he did not know. I recall too that every year a famous tape cassette had to be prepared for Christmas or Easter and updated in 60 languages, which he listened to again and again to prepare for the Urbi et Orbi blessing, and almost every time we had to add one or two new languages that had been requested from some country in the world... Do you know how to say “Happy Christmas” in Samoan? I recall it very well even now: “Ia manuia le Kirisimasi”. As a communicator, John Paul II was able to use his voice very effectively. I have already recalled the impression of his first speech to the world and the way he pronounced the words in a strong and persuasive tone: “Do not be afraid! Open the doors to Christ!” His youthful experience as a stage actor now returned to the service of communication for the whole world. Pope Wojtyla always felt free to express his feelings even with the tone of his voice. He really cried out to express his outrage and the strength of his beliefs. When he admonished his people in Polish because they were not making good use of the freedom regained after previous oppression, or when, in the Valley of the Temples in Agrigento, he threatened divine punishment on the Mafiosi and told them to convert: these were real cries that got under the skin! And then his ability to dialogue with the crowds, in particular with young people, in a spontaneous way, interacting with those FEDERICO LOMBARDI, SJ

present, pacing his speech with pauses and spaces for applause: all this remains unforgettable. Later, we had the different style of Pope Benedict, characterized rather by a conceptual, dense and linear expression. Now we have again a dialogical style with Pope Francis. This complementarity and alternation of different forms of expression is beautiful! But, in addition to his use of languages and his own voice, the pontificate of Pope Wojtyla remains unforgettable also for the “gestures.” John Paul II had an extraordinary ability to make gestures, to place strong, expressive “signs” through which he communicated his message even more effectively than through words that were spoken or written, gestures made in significant places, where his endless journeys took him. They included his plea for forgiveness for the tragedy of the slaves deported from 45 Africa to the Maison des esclaves on Gorée Island, from where they were embarked on slave ships to the Americas. It was a request for forgiveness that he wanted expressly in the audio recording so that it could be documented and disseminated. Or who can forget his image in prayer before the Wailing Wall of the Temple of Jerusalem and his hand placing a piece of prayer-bearing paper in a crack in the wall? Or his embrace at the foot of the Crucifix on the Day of Forgiveness of the Great Jubilee? And perhaps more than all the others, who can forget the images of the conversation in prison between him and his attacker, Ali Agca? Looking at them again after some time, one can say that perhaps they will remain among the most moving and significant of the entire pontificate of John Paul II. They are the most concrete and effective images of Christian forgiveness we have ever seen in our lives, indeed in our times. Yet a natural and religious modesty would have made many, perhaps most, think that it was not a moment to be exposed to the prying eye of the cameras. Today we can say: “Blessed is television!”, which has preserved them for us. They are an announcement of the Gospel in deeds. All this we owe to the courage and freedom of spirit with which Pope Wojtyla showed himself naturally to the world through the media with his intense and brilliant gestures, which were always sincere. JOHN PAUL II COMMUNICATOR

Those who have had responsibility in past years for the archives of the Vatican Television Center have realized that these images are documents of history, no less important for tomorrow than those preserved in the much more solemn and renowned Vatican Archives. They are gestures that have made history; they are milestones in the history of the Church today.

A ‘teacher of peoples’ But it would be reductive if the whole discourse continued focused only on John Paul II’s extraordinary way of communicating. Let us therefore also consider the authoritativeness with which he communicated to the peoples of the world. We mean to say that, following Pope Wojtyla closely and trying to collaborate in his service of communicating a 46 message of salvation and peace to the Church and humanity, I was always deeply struck by his authoritative way of speaking to the peoples of the world, as “teacher of peoples.” In his second speech to the United Nations, in 1995, and on other occasions, he spoke about the “family of peoples,” the recognition of peoples’ rights, their identity, culture, language and tradition. He spoke of their right to self-determination. But it was on the occasion of individual trips that this speech became specific and concrete. In each journey the pope addressed the peoples, not so much the governments, but especially the peoples as living historical subjects. We heard this kind of discourse resonate with great force, especially in the pope’s journeys in the 1990s to countries that had left the dominance of the Soviet regime, or attained new independence. In that decade he made many such journeys. Let us remember: Czechoslovakia, Poland, Hungary, Albania, the Baltic countries, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Romania, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria. In his speeches, he evoked the history of individual peoples, their geographical location, the great protagonists, and thus identified the specific vocation of each people as the subject of history and challenged it to assume its collective responsibility to put its wealth and creativity at the service of the family of peoples. In this way, a healthy patriotism – quite different FEDERICO LOMBARDI, SJ

from nationalism – emerged that was positively inserted into a much broader horizon, a fascinating horizon of coexistence and enriching exchanges in respect and love, not in prevarication. In the Letter for the 50th anniversary of the end of the Second World War the pope even formulated a new commandment: “Love other peoples as your own.” In our opinion, there has not yet existed any other historical personality who has been able to assume authoritatively as John Paul II did the role of “teacher of the peoples,” receiving such a wide acceptance from the moral point of view. He was recognized as an authority that set itself at a “higher” level – higher than conflicts and partisan interests – and therefore credible in his references to values recognized by all and to the universal common good. 47 But how did John Paul II manage to win the respect and attention of public opinion and the media in much of the world, to be considered a superior moral authority and a credible man of peace? Although his voice was often not heard, on several occasions his was the strongest and most authoritative voice for peace in the world. Suffice it to recall the constancy with which he spoke of peace and sent his envoys to national capitals , to Washington and Baghdad, to try to avert the imminent Gulf War. So why was he so respected? It was not obvious or easy. Much of the media and their owners belong to a culture that is far from well-disposed toward the Church and the demanding moral coherence of Pope Wojtyla. But over time many critics had to recognize the unique authority of this fighter for the cause of God and humanity. Apart from the innate gifts of human expressiveness that have already been mentioned, the long-term winning factor, in the relationship established by John Paul II with public opinion and the media, seems to be essentially this: he always showed himself to the world as fully available and open, because he was absolutely sincere and loyal in his relationship with God and with others, absolutely “at home” with his conscience as a person, as a Christian and as a pastor, hence his courage and naturalness in letting himself be seen. We could see him crying, laughing, praying, preaching with strength – even shouting – JOHN PAUL II COMMUNICATOR or keeping silent, walking in the mountains. He showed the human face of the pontificate. He joked with young people, he kissed boys and girls. In short, he was freely himself before the eyes of the world. And he was serene and strong in presenting himself in deeds and words, without ever giving any impression of seeking the consent of, or becoming subject to the power of the media. In short, the media understood in the long run that they were dealing with a person who was not afraid of them and would not allow himself to be dominated or exploited by them, but who had something (or rather a lot) to say that was important for their audience; that they were dealing with someone who helped them find the correct meaning of their work, avoiding the game of deception in the search for consensus. John Paul 48 II did not act, but always expressed his message clearly and decisively, even when he was unpopular. In this sense Cardinal Stanislaw Dziwisz, to characterize the relationship between the pope and the media, spoke of “friendship despite the distance.”

The message of suffering In this broad context of the coherent life and witness of John Paul II, the communication of suffering became the communication of an essential dimension of life itself. And it had a long and broad development, rightly corresponding to the exceptional length and breadth of the pontificate. People know that sickness and suffering are a considerable part of human life on this earth, so it was right – in a certain sense – that a pontiff who accompanied such a wide stretch of people’s lives – as many as 26 years! – was also a personal sharer in the significant place of physical suffering in most people’s lives. Thus the pope’s message eventually became less and less a message of words, and he became more and more identified with his own personal life, lived as a believer before God and offered with simplicity to God’s people and humanity. As I reflect on what John Paul II’s inner attitude must have been in this situation, before God and before humanity, some of his words forcefully return to mind. They come from the Roman Triptych – his last poetic composition – where, contemplating FEDERICO LOMBARDI, SJ

the Sistine Chapel, he meditates before God, Creator and Judge, and speaks of the “One who sees,” the First Seer: Omnia autem nuda et aperta sunt ante oculos Eius (“All things are naked and open before his eyes”) (Heb 4:13). All reality, including our life, is “naked and open” under the eye of God. Now, a life that knows it is always under the eye of God, can be lived without fearing other eyes, even in the weakness and humiliation of infirmity, in a certain sense reminding the “second” set of eyes that what counts most – for everyone – is the gaze of the “First Seer.” A strong signal of the pope’s transparency about his life, including his illness, had already been given in the Angelus of July 12, 1992, in which he announced that he would be admitted to the Gemelli Hospital in the evening for tests. He needed an 49 operation for intestinal cancer, which would be followed with intense interest by a huge audience. At the Angelus just a few words were enough, but it was striking that for the first time the pope himself was sharing his health problems, involving the people by his own choice in his situation, breaking a prevailing tradition of silence and discretion about the pope’s health, about which we were accustomed to being informed only when events were in progress or had already occurred, and only when absolutely necessary. This was a good preparation for the following years, when the transparency of infirmity and suffering would no longer be due to the announcement of something not evident to the eye, but precisely to the increasingly visible signs of the disease. We should not overlook the fact that John Paul II’s final illness – after the attack, the tumor, the fracture of the femur – was a particularly visible disease – Parkinson’s. It has a somewhat predictable and progressive course, whose increasingly evident symptoms (trembling, walking problems, increasing speech difficulties, uncontrolled facial expressions, gradual paralysis) could be seen and met with our concern and sharing in his pain. Here the problem of communication was no longer one of public information, of news about the pope’s state of health, but of the visual presentation of the sick person in his public action, especially in events that were frequently and almost continuously JOHN PAUL II COMMUNICATOR broadcast live. Based on the experience communicated by the Vatican Television Center from 2001 until the death of the pope in 2005, one spontaneously thinks that the period of the last illness and death of John Paul II was the culminating moment of the whole story of communication between him and the world. And one can without fear speak of a positive historical event of communication that generates an experience of union. The images of the suffering pope that the CTV had to continuously film and broadcast were a source of questions: Is it appropriate to show the pope suffering from Parkinson’s disease? To what extent? How to accompany this story on camera with love and respect, without exceeding the limits of discretion? How long will this last and where will it lead? In the end we can say that the pope, once again and 50 definitively, was stronger than the media and that they were still at the service of his message, and in the most intense of ways. He wanted clearly and decisively to live his illness to the end without hiding it from the eyes of the world. It was he who wanted to appear at the window and try to speak on the last Easter and on the last Wednesday after Easter without being able to anymore. In those moments we were upset. Now we know he was right to do so. Now we remember with admiration and gratitude his testimony of service and human truth in life, sickness and death. As in any very painful mortal disease, what seemed to us an ordeal without end is over, or rather “has been accomplished.” It is a design realized to the end. It was good that the television stations were there, even with all their ridiculous anxieties to arrive first, because it was good that they were ready to make an immense swathe of humanity participate in the agony and death of a known, esteemed and loved person, who had the courage not to hide his death, but to share with everyone what death is, lived in pure conscience and in faith. Even for us, then, the pressing demands of the media were no longer the result of the obsession with competition from a cynical world, but was the demand of those who knew that they had millions – at times billions – of people behind them, who felt deeply involved and wanted to participate. FEDERICO LOMBARDI, SJ

They were the peoples whom the pope had wanted to visit personally and to whom he spoke authoritatively as teacher. And in those days their way to participate was that offered by the media. It was precisely because of this that John Paul II had spoken to them in their own languages in those endless Christmas and Easter greetings, knowing full well that St. Peter’s Square was now only the small center of a much larger square, which extended to the ends of the world.

Death in faith: the last and greatest message And so we come to death. That John Paul II’s funeral was the most followed event in the world until then – and perhaps even until now – thanks to the radio, television and also the internet, is certain. But what interests us here is not so much the 51 record audience, but why this happened. Now, it is clear that the human family has recognized – as was also revealed by the unique participation of the representatives of the peoples at the funeral – the significance for humanity of the life and work of John Paul II and – we would add – of his illness thus lived and his death. It is certainly a positive fact that on these values of service to humanity, peace and coherent religious faith, a historical event with immense ramifications from the point of view of communication took place. It was a sign of hope for the world of social communications itself. It is not only wars that make the greatest news, but also the life, illness and death of the great witness of our time. A media scholar, Lloyd Baugh, said and witnessed personally: “The pope’s decision to live his illness publicly, before a world that has become a village, as a courageous gesture of evangelical solidarity with the sick and dying throughout the world, as a positive and redeeming experience, has had an immense impact throughout the world, and has instilled in countless people the growing sense of being in communion with him.” Certainly, many people have personally followed the events through television in their homes, but there was also a very intense sense of participation in a shared event. There was an awareness that personal communion with the pope who was JOHN PAUL II COMMUNICATOR suffering also became communion between the faithful and countless people, beyond geographical and cultural boundaries and distances. Where there were big screens, people went spontaneously, to live the event together; they exchanged frequent electronic messages. The huge turnout of pilgrims in Rome for the funeral was only the tip of the iceberg of world participation facilitated by the media. And this is a very positive sign: the global village can experience compassion and human and spiritual closeness in a sincere and authentic way. There was also a real experience of communication in a Christian spirit. It is not of minor importance to say so. Many people warned, during the pontificate of Pope Wojtyla, of the ambiguities of mass communications and expressed the doubt that here was a personality cult rather than a true Gospel 52 proclamation. And indeed it should not be taken for granted that television will not focus attention on the famous person rather than on the religious message that is close to his heart. But we can be convinced that on the whole the religious message, of faith, that was dear to Saint John Paul II has been transmitted. To realize this, it will suffice to reflect simply on three crucial moments in the story. They were decisive: the image of the pope holding and embracing the Cross for a long time in his chapel as the Way of the Cross on his last Good Friday took place at the Colosseum; the gathered silence of the crowd in prayer after the announcement of his death; the Gospel pages turning in the wind on the wooden coffin during the funeral. Suffering and death were lived by John Paul II in faith; the television broadcast it, and the people, the vast majority of the people, understood it.

Epilogue John Paul II: destroyer of the wall that divided Europe; witness of faith in the face of atheistic ideologies; animator of ideals for the world’s youth; systematic pastor, who wanted to visit every parish in Rome, every diocese in Poland, every country in the world; tireless pilgrim to every corner of the Earth to bring to every person the message of human dignity, which is revealed in the encounter with the Redeemer; authoritative teacher, capable FEDERICO LOMBARDI, SJ

of showing nations their historical vocation in the common journey of the family of peoples toward peace; powerful and strong communicator, capable of interacting directly with the greater masses; master of vocal expression and symbolic gesture; polyglot by mission, to demonstrate respect and closeness to every culture; communicator finally with the silence of the voice, but with the sign of suffering, of visible illness, lived before the world in the obedience of faith, until the last breath. Thus, John Paul II spent 26 unforgettable years of his pontificate before the world and consigned them to history. He lived them thanks to his extraordinary capacity for human and evangelical communication, the transparency of his witness of faith and also thanks to the work of the media. Thus, John Paul II fulfilled his mission by spending the different ages of his life 53 before the eyes of the world, the time of vigor as well as that of seniority. We can well say that he did not hide anything from us, not only showing us his spirituality, but also – what is perhaps even more rare – his humanity. Omnia autem nuda et aperta sunt ante oculos Eius... The First Seer saw everything in transparency... the true, the good, the beautiful... Adam who sinned hides, but why should those who let themselves be conquered by the Gospel still want to hide? It was with this intense love of the Truth, with the passion of its splendor, with faith in its intrinsic strength, that Saint John Paul II presented himself to the end before the eyes of the world for what he was and what he believed. “Do not be afraid! Open the doors, indeed, open wide the doors to Christ!” Syria and Turkey Battle for Idlib Province

Giovanni Sale, SJ

Nine Years of War in Syria Nine years have passed since the Syrian conflict began, since the optimism of the 2011 Arab Spring turned into tragedy. For Syria, it all began on March 15 of that year, when protesters took to the streets in Daraa, in the southwest of the country. Soon protests – mostly 54 peaceful – spread throughout the country, demanding an end to the 40-year rule of the Assad family. The state police, as always, reacted violently against unarmed people, and within a few weeks the death toll was in the hundreds. In response, many opponents of the regime organized themselves and took up arms. After nine years of civil war in Syria, 384,000 have died in the conflict.1 In addition, according to the UN, the number of displaced persons since the beginning of the conflict is around seven million, and the number of refugees abroad – especially in Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan and across Europe – is estimated at over five million. To the number of displaced persons should be added the number of people who have been living in camps for several months now in the small province of Idlib, near the Turkish- Syrian border (closed in 2018 due to the intense bombing by the regime and its allies), with the hope of being able to cross the border or be “relocated” to the areas they had abandoned.2

La Civiltà Cattolica, En. Ed. Vol. 4, no. 07 art. 5, 0620: 10.32009/22072446.0720.5

1.See P. Del Re, “Siria, 10 anni di guerra: 384 mila morti e 11 milioni di profughi”, in la Repubblica, March 15, 2020; O. Cuthbert, “La guerra senza fine”, in Internazionale, March 20, 2020, 29. 2.The price demanded by human traffickers to cross the border is on average 3,000 euros per person, and there is no guarantee of success. For an average Syrian citizen this figure is considerable, and is usually collected with the contribution of family members. GIOVANNI SALE, SJ

In the winter months of 2019, this province – which has become a huge refugee camp3 – suffered heavy air strikes by the Russian Air Force and Syrian government forces, which made life impossible for its inhabitants and forced many of them to flee. Jean Larquet, spokesperson for the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, warned on February 5 that “there is no safe place left in Idlib because bombs are falling everywhere.”4 This is the shame of the Syrian war. Several powers – Syria, Russia, Iran and Turkey – are fighting over a small territory where about three and a half million people live, causing an unprecedented humanitarian crisis. In the meantime, the war that seemed almost over after the Damascus government had won some battles thanks to the 55 intervention of Russia, has instead in these months re-exploded, and this time the contenders – especially Russia and Turkey – seem intent on winning the war: neither, in fact, wants to lose face over Idlib. Even if so far the conflict has been “frozen” by a ceasefire agreed between Moscow and Ankara last March, the situation may deteriorate from one moment to the next, affecting millions of people locked up in a small territory. For the moment, the truce seems to be holding. However, according to recent information, it is increasingly being violated, and it seems that Assad is determined to recover Idlib. The Western democracies have one more chance in Syria to avoid being accused by the court of history of neglecting the fate of that people. They must ensure that the ceasefire agreement, signed on March 5, is fully respected and, above all, ensure that both the Russians and the Turks, as well as the other belligerents in the territory, withdraw their weapons and soldiers and give the Syrians the opportunity to decide their future for

3.This is how a French journalist describes the place: “A wave of hundreds of thousands of men, women and children is ending up in a narrow and overpopulated territory. They flood the fields, cover the hills, invade the cities. They penetrate schools and shops, infiltrate ruined buildings, the narrowest recesses, the first floor of a mosque, the basement of a football stadium” (B. Barthe, “L’ostinata sopravvivenza degli sfollati di Idlib”, in Internazionale, March 20, 2020, 28). 4.M. A. Jalil, “Gli interessi di Russia e Turchia”, ibid., February 28, 2020, 53. SYRIA AND TURKEY BATTLE FOR IDLIB PROVINCE themselves, under the supervision, of course, of the international community. However, at least for the time being, no part of this strategy seems feasible.

The Idlib issue In order to understand the reasons behind the conflict in Idlib, it is necessary to understand the strategic importance that this small province has for each of the warring parties, that is for Syria and its allies on the one hand, and for Turkey on the other. Idlib Province in north-west Syria was the first in which a “free territory” was established in 2012. It is still a base for anti- Assad groups and jihadists. To the north it borders Turkey, to the south-west it adjoins the region of Latakia, ancestral territory of the Assads, and to the north-east the Kurdish-majority district 56 of Afrin, conquered in March 2018 by Turkey and used as a buffer zone between the two neighboring countries, especially – as we mentioned in a previous article5 – with a view to contain Kurdish militia. This province – or rather, what remains under the control of Turkey today – since January, 2019, has been practically administered by the jihadist group, Hayat tahrir al Sham (“Organization for the Liberation of the Levant”, HTS), which was at first tied to al-Qaeda, but then detached from it so as not to be included in the “black list” of terrorist movements drawn up by the USA. It seems that they took command of the territory with the consent of Turkey, whose objective at that moment was to push back Kurdish forces from the border. In fact, many “rebels” participated during those months in Turkish military operations against the Kurds of the People’s Protection Units, with the objective of liberating the Arab villages of the province of Aleppo, on the border with Idlib. The locals complain that “it was Turkey who handed over the keys of Idlib to Hayat tahrir al Sham.”6

5.See G. Sale, “La Turchia e le ‘enclave’ curde in Siria”, in Civ. Catt. 2018 I 476-490. 6.C. Hayek, “I siriani di Idlib traditi dalla Turchia”, in Internazionale, February 7, 2020, 26. GIOVANNI SALE, SJ

Compared to Isis, this jihadist group has a greater capacity to manage relations with communities in the places where it is engaged. In fact, its members have mixed with the natives, with the anti-Assad “rebels” and with other radical groups who have come here from other parts of the country, concentrating almost exclusively on the fight against the Damascus regime. Instead of conquering the territory and then “cleaning it up”, ferociously eliminating its enemies, as the Islamic State did, they tried to gain the trust of the local population and others who had sought refuge in the territory during the long conflict. The province of Idlib is therefore of great importance to both contenders. For Syria, it is a matter of re-exerting sovereignty over its territory, of definitively defeating its most stubborn enemies, who have been barricaded in the province 57 during these years of war. In fact, according to the Sochi Agreement between Turkey and Russia in 2018, numerous jihadists of different orientations, together with their families, have been transferred to this area from other parts of Syria. It is also important for Assad to occupy this territory because it is adjacent to the “Alawite family fiefdom,” where his clan lives and where his most trusted men, including his bodyguard, come from. For Turkey, instead, it is a question of maintaining the management of an important outpost in Syrian territory, to control, beyond its national borders, the portion of territory occupied by the Kurds and today administered by the Party of the Democratic Union (PYD), that is, the Syrian branch of the PKK, which Ankara considers a terrorist organization. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoǧan knows that to lose this territory would mean for him to be excluded from the peace negotiations and to have no role in the reconstruction of Syria. At the moment, 70 percent of this territory is occupied by Assad (supported by the powerful Russian air force), the rest by the Kurds (armed by the USA) and only a small part by the Turks, who are present through an Arab contingent. Turkey, in short, is not willing to give up its interests in the border area, even if this entails the start of a military operation, which is in fact underway. SYRIA AND TURKEY BATTLE FOR IDLIB PROVINCE

Russia, for its part, is determined to consolidate the victories achieved and to safeguard the conquered areas. After five years of war, Vladimir Putin “wants a victory for his protégé Assad in Idlib, the last province controlled by ‘rebels,’ and for his expansionist aims over the region. He wants to declare an epochal strategic triumph against the West, in particular at the expense of the United States.”7 What is Putin’s strategy in the Syrian war? Probably that of strengthening his major role in the international political scene, possibly with this being recognized by the USA. He knows that the war in Syria must end as soon as possible; his country, in fact, is exhausted by the economic crisis and coronavirus; moreover, as shown by the latest surveys, his popularity at home is at an all-time low.8 Putin is aware that 58 the strategic future of Russia is not to be the Middle East, but in Europe, especially the Ukraine and other neighboring countries, and he wants to prevent them from succumbing to US flattery in both economic and military terms.

The Turkish operation ‘Spring Shield’ After conquering one after the other the areas in the hands of the opposition – from Aleppo to Eastern Ghouta, from Homs to Daraa – using the Russian Air Force and, on the ground, the soldiers and heavy artillery of Iran and of Hezbollah, Assad already intended to target Idlib, where there was the greatest concentration of his opponents and fighters who had refused reconciliation with Damascus. Moscow signed an agreement with Turkey in Sochi in September 2018, by which a de facto ceasefire was declared for Idlib province. Since then, a slow policy of erosion has been implemented by Damascus, which began with sporadic attacks and ended with a massive Moscow- led operation.

7.S. Tisdall, “Il gioco pericoloso di Ankara in Siria”, ibid. March 6, 2020, 32. 8.See “Sondaggio, Vladimir Putin crolla, vicino al minimo storico: il coronavirus è la sfida più difficile in 20 anni di presidenza” (www. liberoquotidiano.it), April 22, 2020. GIOVANNI SALE, SJ

Since the beginning of this year, Damascus’ interventions in the province have been increasing in intensity. Although the area was covered by the ceasefire, Assad wanted to regain control of the M4 and M5 motorways, which link the capital to the Mediterranean coast and Aleppo. In addition, Moscow accused Ankara of not disarming the jihadist groups active in the province, as provided for in the agreement.9 On February 2, the Syrian army killed eight Turkish soldiers in Idlib province. In response to this hostile act, the Turkish armed forces attacked a number of Syrian military posts. A few days later, the Russian Air Force and the Syrian army conquered 20 villages and towns in the south of the province, reaching the city of Saraqeb. President Erdoğan then demanded the Damascus army withdraw from the area 59 surrounding the Turkish observation posts established in Sochi. Meanwhile, about 9,000 soldiers and 2,000 Turkish military vehicles advanced into Idlib province. On February 28, a Turkish convoy was hit, with the deaths of 36 soldiers. Under other circumstances, this hostile act would have triggered a war between the different countries, but this was not the case here. Erdoğan has avoided blaming Russia for the serious incident, and the Kremlin has shrugged off all responsibility for these events. But, according to some analysts, the dynamics of the events, which began when the Turks attacked Russian planes flying over the area, must be interpreted differently. Indeed, it even seems that the order to attack came from Moscow itself.10 Immediately after these events, the Turkish President ordered a full-scale attack, calling this military operation, in his own style, “Spring Shield.” Through it, Erdoğan had several objectives. In the first place, he wanted to stop the offensive by Russia and its Damascus allies “on the last shred of Syria in the hands of the rebels,” thus averting a humanitarian catastrophe, that is, the massacre of one million civilians who, in order to

9.See G. Crescente, “Russia e Turchia fanno un passo indietro dal baratro” (https://www.internazionale.it/opinione/gabriele-crescente/2020/03/06/russia- turchia-accordo-idlib), March 6, 2020. 10.See S. Tisdall, “Il gioco pericoloso di Ankara in Siria”, op. cit., 32. SYRIA AND TURKEY BATTLE FOR IDLIB PROVINCE escape the bombing of the Russian air force, had crowded the Turkish-Syrian border. Secondly, he wanted to give a show of force, “to make all those involved in Syria understand that Idlib, for Turkey, is the red line. Finally – or rather in principle – Operation Spring Shield allows the Turkish Armed Forces to take a significant step forward toward the Aleppo-Mosul line.”11 This is the border of Greater Turkey delineated in January 1920 by the last Ottoman Parliament, where the Kemalists had the majority. The so-called “National Pact” provided that the new Republic of Turkey on that border would include the cities of Aleppo, Mosul, Arbil and Kirkuk, cities that, instead, the international community assigned to Syria in the negotiations. For Erdoğan today it is important to gain control over the city of Aleppo, which is located a few kilometers from 60 the province of Idlib. The Turkish attack was very determined, a sign of the resolve with which the Turks intend to dominate this province and take root in Syria. The operation forced Assad to slow down the attack and allowed the rebels to occupy some positions in the southern part of Idlib. Since September 2015, when Moscow went to the rescue of Damascus, it was the first time that the Syrians had retreated in the war. This military operation partially changed the balance between Ankara and Moscow. After these events Putin invited President Erdoğan to Moscow for a conference on the ongoing conflict.

The humanitarian front: between poverty and coronavirus On the humanitarian front, as in previous campaigns, the situation for refugees and displaced persons became severe. While carrying out the military operation against the “Orthodox- Shiite” coalition, Erdoğan announced that its coastguard and the army would no longer stop refugees fleeing from Turkey to Greece, i.e. to the EU. This in fact happened. It was a tactic to force the EU, at that time intent on managing the coronavirus health emergency, to support Turkey’s political

11.D. Santoro, “La guerra tra Turchia e Russia a Idlib non è inevitabile” (www.limesonline.com), February 28, 2020. GIOVANNI SALE, SJ

cause and territorial claims. The EU had offered EUR 700 million to help the new refugees, but this was not accepted.12 Turkey, said Erdoğan, did not want money from the EU – at least not that comparatively small sum! – but instead wanted other countries to relocate the three million Syrian refugees currently in its territory. The Turkish president actually wanted the EU to support his claims against Russia and other regional actors. In response, European governments thundered: “It is unacceptable that human beings should be used as a means of political pressure.” In reality this was the case, and in a few weeks more than 40,000 refugees left Turkey, crossing the Evros River, near the city of Edirne, to enter Greek territory. The Greek military did everything they could – even using tear gas and attacking the small boats that arrived on the islands – to send 61 them back, but to no avail. So the old camps of the previous wave of refugees – first of all the one in Moria, at the hotspot on the island of Lesbos – were filled with new guests. The living conditions in these centers are still very basic, and the coronavirus emergency makes living at close quarters even more precarious. Already, in Moria there are cases of Covid-19. People affected by the virus were immediately isolated and treated. Numerous cases of infection were also recorded in other centers.13 How did the EU behave? The President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, thanked Greece for acting as a “shield” against immigration, and gave assurances that the Frontex agency – the EU’s external border control agency – would send men and means to deal with the situation. But the EU did not specify whether and how the more than 40,000 refugees on the Greek islands in inhuman and unacceptable conditions would be relocated. From the humanitarian point of view, the situation has become even more complicated on the internal front, i.e. in

12.See “Strage di soldati turchi in Siria. Erdogan annuncia: non fermeremo più i migranti verso l’Europa. Onu: ‘Rischio escalation’” (www.repubblica.it/ esteri/), February 27, 2020. 13.See “La situazione sull’isola hotspot greca di Lesbo e nel campo di Moria”, May 8, 2020. SYRIA AND TURKEY BATTLE FOR IDLIB PROVINCE the province of Idlib, where about one million people, mostly children, have left their homes since the beginning of this year to escape the war and the continuous Russian bombing. They have spent the winter months in a “no man’s land”14 trapped between the Assad advance and the concrete wall that separates Syria from Turkey. Last May alone, several hundred thousand people returned to their homes, although the situation had not fully stabilized. Others have been “relocated” to the area.15 In any case, the emergency continues and might become very serious due to the spread of Covid-19 among the refugees.16

The ceasefire agreement between Ankara and Moscow The agreement reached by Turkey and Russia on March 5, 2020, and still in force, can be summarized in three main points. 62 The first concerns the establishment of a ceasefire in Idlib province from midnight between March 5 and 6. The second concerns the demarcation of a humanitarian corridor along the M4 international motorway, linking Latakia to Aleppo, six kilometers north and six kilometers south on the arterial road crossing the region. According to the two leaders, this should serve to facilitate the movement of civilians in the area and the relocation of the refugees who are crowded on the Syrian- Turkish border in the Idlib area. The third point, which is very important for the success of the agreement, is a joint Russian- Turkish patrol of the above-mentioned corridor on the M4.17 The talks took place in the Kremlin and lasted about six hours. There was a willingness on the part of both leaders to

14.F. Mannocchi, “Nella trappola di Erdoǧan”, L’Espresso, March 8, 2020, 54. 15.Despite the ceasefire, the conflict between the belligerents has never stopped. According to the Response Coordination Group, it has caused two civilian casualties and still allowed 234,597 displaced persons to return to their homes in the rural areas of Idlib and Aleppo. See “Siria: Idlib a due mesi dal cessate il fuoco” (https://sicurezzainternazionale.luiss.it/2020/05/06/siria-idlib- due-mesi-dal-cessate-fuoco/), May 6, 2020. 16.On the spread of Covid-19 in Syria, see A. Spadaro, “Syria and Coronavirus. No Time to Waste”, in Civ. Catt. En. April 2020, https://www. laciviltacattolica.com/syria-and-coronavirus-no-time-to-waste/ 17.See A. Scott, “Putin ed Erdoǧan cercano una tregua per Idlib”, in Il Sole 24 Ore, March 6, 2020. GIOVANNI SALE, SJ

come to an understanding and to stop the conflict. “Let’s not risk our relationship for Idlib,”18 Putin told Erdoǧan before the discussions began. The talks started with the leaders discussing the reasons that had undermined and thwarted the previous 2018 agreement. According to Putin, the Turks in Idlib should have disarmed the terrorists and had not done so; according to Erdoǧan, the Russians should have stopped the long counteroffensive of the Damascus government.19 Then they started discussing the three points of the ceasefire agreement. With this agreement, Turkish propaganda was trying to obtain the maximum internal consensus, explaining that the southern borders of Turkey were thus moved practically to the A4 motorway in Idlib province20; that the problem of Syrian refugees had been partly solved; and that the fight against 63 the PKK had increased. This position was designed to help Erdoǧan deal with a difficult situation at home. However, in the negotiations he proposed to Putin to “rebuild Syria together with the proceeds of Gazīra oil and gas, which are currently in the hands of the PKK.”21 The statements made by the two leaders at the end of the talks and the agreement differed substantially. While Erdoǧan stated that Turkey “had the right to respond to the attacks by Damascus,” Putin said that Damascus had sovereignty over the whole of Syria, including Idlib, and this “made the Turkish

18.Ibid. 19.See “Siria. Turchia-Russia: cessate il fuoco a Idlib” (www.nena-news.it/ siria-turchia-russia-cessate-il-fuoco-a-idlib), March 6, 2020. 20.This was a very important point for Turkey. It is worth remembering that Erdoǧan had implemented the threat to unleash the flow of refugees toward the EU in an attempt to appease Turkish public opinion. Already dissatisfied with the presence of millions of Syrian refugees on its territory, Turks were now seeing their own soldiers die in Syria. In fact, 56 Turkish soldiers have died in Idlib since the beginning of February. That is why the Turkish President, on this point, had to give good news to his citizens, claiming as part of government propaganda that the refugee crisis was being resolved and that Turkey had partly lightened this burden. See M. Gurcan, “Le questioni da risolvere dopo la tregua di Idlib”, in Internazionale, May 13, 2020, 45. 21.D. Santoro, “Nel Mediterraneo orientale la Turchia cerca l’impero, L’Italia ne sarà espulsa” (www.limesonline.com/cartaceo/nel-mediterraneo-orientale- la-turchia-cerca-limpero), May 11, 2020. SYRIA AND TURKEY BATTLE FOR IDLIB PROVINCE operation illogical and illegitimate.”22 The agreement, Putin reiterated, had to be concluded in any case, especially to end the suffering of the Syrians. Joint Turkish-Russian patrols of a section of the M4 began on March 15, while interventions by the Syrian army continued to hit the area. “From March 5 to May 7, the total number of refugees returning to Idlib and Aleppo exceeded 250,000. [...] On May 11, hundreds of displaced persons and Syrian refugees protested in the streets of Aleppo, demanding to return to their homes, located in areas mostly controlled by the Syrian regime.”23 It seems that the patrol operations in recent times have met with resistance from the civilian population. In fact, many fear that their areas, currently controlled by the rebels, 64 will be ceded to Assad.24 The situation is still very unstable and it is not possible to predict how it will evolve in the future.25 Suffice it to say that the agreement signed by Putin and Erdoǧan in Moscow was not accepted by the Hayat tahrir al Sham group, which in fact still manages the Turkish- controlled area of Idlib. The truce seems to be holding for the moment. Russia and Turkey appear to want to prevent the situation from getting out of hand. It should also be borne in mind that in recent years the two countries have strengthened their economic and trade ties, cooperating increasingly in the energy and military sectors. Moscow is Ankara’s second largest trading partner. In addition, Russia sells cereals and gas to Turkey, and the new TurkStream pipeline will allow it to export its “blue gold” to Europe, bypassing Ukraine. Although Turkey is part of NATO,

22.A. Scott, “Putin ed Erdoǧan cercano una tregua per Idlib”, op. cit. 23.“Siria, Idlib: un quadro della situazione delle ultime ore” (sicurezza internazionale), May 12, 2020. 24.See ibid. 25.It must also be kept in mind that between the months of April and May, the Israeli Air Force (which acts with American consent) carried out at least seven bombings in Syria, on places occupied by Iranians or Hezbollah (in the province of Homs and in that of Palmyra), killing about 30 people. Thus continues the conflict between Israel and Iran, fought however in a third territory. See B. Valli, “Israele-Iran, la guerra segreta”, in Corriere della Sera, May 14, 2020. GIOVANNI SALE, SJ

Moscow sells its S-400 missiles to Ankara and is building the first Turkish nuclear power plant on its territory.26 In this situation, neither side is taking any risks over Idlib. The global health emergency must also be taken into account. At the moment the two countries are fighting another equally dangerous and deadly internal war against the coronavirus. This creates instability, discontent among the people and an economic recession whose effects are not yet known. It seems unlikely, therefore, that, at least for now, the great powers will commit themselves to activate conflicts, especially if these are dictated by dreams of power. An appeal for a global ceasefire was launched on March 24 by the Secretary-General of the United Nations, António Guterres, and was immediately taken up by Pope Francis. In the course 65 of the Angelus of March 29, he asked everyone, especially those responsible for the nations, to make “a renewed commitment to overcome rivalries. Conflicts are not resolved through war! It is necessary to overcome antagonisms and contrasts through dialogue and a constructive search for peace.”27

26.See G. Agliastro, “Putin-Erdoǧan, intesa sulla Siria: a Idlib scatta il cessate il fuoco”, in La Stampa, March 6, 2020. 27.Francis, Angelus, March 29, 2020, in w2.vatican.va Rembrandt, the Artist in the Mirror of the Word

Lucian Lechintan, SJ

Als Ich Can (How can I): these are the words engraved on the frame of the first self-portrait in history, a work by Jan van Eyck.1 Three words and a challenge to generations of artists to measure themselves against this challenging artistic claim. In the case of the great Dutch painter Rembrandt van Rijn (1606-69), his 66 success was exceptional; the painter brought this painting genre to a level of perfection that had never been reached before in the art of self-portraiture. As a beggar, or as the Prodigal Son, a monarch with a scepter in his hand or in military dress, next to his beloved bride Saskia, or in the guise of the famous Greek painter Zeuxis, in total there are more than 70 faces of the same individual that mark, for more than 40 years, moments of intense activity, moments of human and spiritual fervor. He who was considered the “miracle” of his generation (G. Bucelinus, 1664), “a humorist of the first category that everyone despised” (F. Baldinucci, 1686), has remained in the eyes of posterity as an artist whose cup overflowed with the wine of celebrity and, at the same time, disappointments.

Rembrandt in the guise of Saint Paul In one of his last self-portraits, from the year 1661, the artist presents himself as imprisoned in Rome, as the Apostle Paul. The painting is exhibited from June 11 until September 30, 2020, in Rome at the Corsini Gallery, near the Vatican, from where

La Civiltà Cattolica, En. Ed. Vol. 4, no. 07 art. 6, 0620: 10.32009/22072446.0720.6

1.See W. Manuth, “Rembrandt e l’autoritratto dell’artista. Tradizione e ricezione” in C. White - Q. Buvelot, Rembrandt stesso, The Hague, Waanders Drukkens, 1999. LUCIAN LECHINTAN, SJ

it was hastily removed in 1799, after being sold at the time of the French occupation. At the end of the exhibition, the canvas will return to the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam. The Roman initiative to bring it back is praiseworthy, not only because it draws attention to the collection of Cardinal Neri Corsini (1685-1770), but also because it allows a re-evaluation of the Roman artistic climate in the mid-eighteenth century. In the context of what Giulio Carlo Argan called “the depressing Roman environment,” aimed only at “moderating the excesses of the Baroque,”2 the presence of a new generation of artists to work (Anton Raphael Mengs) or to learn (Jacques- Louis David) cannot be understood without referring to the role played by collectors, who made Rome a multi-purpose artistic home, oriented not only to antiquity, but also to the recent past. 67 Rembrandt’s self-portrait as St. Paul could be quickly dismissed as a new extravagance of the master and soon forgotten. However, the question of the artist’s identification with the “Apostle of Nations” is intriguing.3 Let us first observe that Rembrandt was a man of the Reformation, who, as we know, took on the task of educating people through Holy Scripture. At that moment in history, with the spread of the printing press, the Bible also became the reference book for the less educated, and from a treasure within the reach of a few it became a mirror of the lives of many people. The artist’s mother herself profited from it. When Rembrandt decided to paint a portrait of her, he presented her engaged in reading Scripture. Her hands, aged by time, touch the sacred text, perceiving not only the roughness of the material, but also the power of the Word radiating to the innermost recesses of the heart. When he painted that portrait, Rembrandt was 25 years old. That same year (1631) he decided to leave his home town of Leiden forever and move to Amsterdam, where he would spend the rest of his life. Undoubtedly, in the bag he carried with him,

2.G. C. Argan, “Introduzione”, in David e Roma, Exhibition Catalogue, Rome, Accademia di Francia, 1981, 18. 3.The issue is treated in H. P. Chapman, Rembrandt’s Self-portraits. A Study in Seventeenth-Century Identity, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1990, 120- 127. REMBRANDT, THE ARTIST IN THE MIRROR OF THE WORD the words of the Bible had real weight. It is no coincidence that later, in memory of his mother, he decided to give his three daughters the name Cornelia, precisely to honor that and perhaps also for the treasure he had inherited. The self-portrait as Paul was painted 30 years later, in 1661, when Rembrandt was already a universally esteemed artist. His face has aged, but is serene; his eyebrows are raised, almost as if to suggest that he has let himself be surprised again by the wind of inspiration. The wrinkled but shining forehead shows that, although deeply marked by the trials of life, he was not defeated by them. If in his self-portraits the artist generally presents himself as a perfect master, proud in front of the easel and content with his social status, this time not without a certain irony, his 68 stature is not the decisive element. As we shall see, awareness of dissonances become essential to understand this portrait.

Three dissonances The first of the dissonances is pictorial and concerns the turban painted with powerful features. It becomes almost an expressionistic element in its own right, and makes one think of the comments of the biographer Cornelis de Bie (1627-1715), who, with regard to Rembrandt’s paintings, said: “There is a veritable essence of life living in them.” The mellow brushstroke of the turban offers a tonal value to the entire composition; the light radiates on to the face, hair and robe. The great expressive freedom of the master is here reinforced by the perfect coordination of the means available. As György Lukács affirms, the artist’s intention was to “contrast nuance with color in an antithetical way; to banish color, that is, the determinations of reality that go beyond the punctuality of the instant; to bring poetic art back to a tangle of nuances”4. The second detail is a symbolic, almost theatrical element: the sword that pierces the heart of the artist, and the drops of blood still flowing on the handle and blade. Barely visible in

4.G. Lukács, “La fisionomia intellettuale dei personaggi artistici”, in Arte e società. Scritti scelti di estetica, vol. I, Rome, Editori Riuniti, 1972, 219. LUCIAN LECHINTAN, SJ

the half-light, the sword is certainly an allusion to the Word of God that penetrates the heart: It is “living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing until it divides soul from spirit, joints from marrow; it is able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart” (Heb 4:12.) To understand this detail more deeply, we should remember that, in Germanic culture, since ancient times, pacts and contracts were concluded with an oath using weapons. A canvas from the same year as the self-portrait –The Oath of the Batavi, which initially was of a considerable size (about 5x5 meters) – represents a pact of this kind concluded between Germans and Romans. Just as taking the toga was for the Romans a sign of a young man’s entry into adulthood, in the same way the handing over of a sword by the chief of a tribe inaugurated a new stage 69 in a person’s life. Rembrandt, who in his self-portrait made use of the representation of the sword, also made an alliance with his artistic vocation, inaugurating at the same time the last stage of his creative period, lived in solitude, but not without a mysterious serenity. The third dissonance is compositional in nature, and comes from the results of the last restoration. It revealed, on the right side of the painting, in the darker area, the railings of a building, a clue that the self-portrait was initially set in a prison.5 The specialists also deciphered the initials of the Hebrew text written on the parchment: Ephesis, a sure allusion to the Letter to the Ephesians, believed in Rembrandt’s time to have been written by Pau while he was in prison in Rome.6 Rembrandt’s existential malaise is explained by some concrete facts. Documents show that at that time, especially from the 1650s onward, the painter’s financial situation had become parlous. He had incurred heavy debts – after buying

5.Cfr E. Buijsen - P. Schatborn - B. Broos, “Autoritratto in veste di San Paolo”, in C. White - Q. Buvelot, Rembrandt stesso, op. cit., 213. 6.See P. J. Van Thiel, “Zelfportret als de apostel Paulus. Rembrandt van Rijn (1606-1669)”, in Openbaar Kunstbezit 13 (1969) 1a-b. Ephesus was also the city where John the Evangelist, the beloved disciple of Jesus, spent the last stage of his life. In this sense, Rembrandt’s self-portrait is meant to be a prophecy about the imminent end of his existence. REMBRANDT, THE ARTIST IN THE MIRROR OF THE WORD a luxurious house in the center of Amsterdam, for which he paid the considerable sum of 13,000 guilders – because of loans that he was unable to pay back to the bankers. As a result, in 1656 all his assets were confiscated: his paintings, furniture, everything in his workshop.7 The canvases that were closest to his heart were sold for derisory sums. Rembrandt, who once received considerable remuneration for a work, now experienced contempt and saw commissions no longer forthcoming. Sometimes he received requests for changes and retouches, humiliating for an artist of his status.8 Other drastic measures were added to the seizure of assets, including the sale of the tomb that belonged to his first wife, Saskia. This profoundly shook the painter. The last great disappointment was in 1660, when his wife and son Titus deprived him of the rights to “ trade in paintings, 70 graphic art, engravings and woodcuts.” After that, he completely lost control of his commercial activities. All he was left with was the activity of painting. Even his son, who seemed to want to follow in his footsteps, abandoned painting and decided to enter the business world. Rembrandt then became, in his artistic vocation, like Paul, a prisoner, which only two lights could still illuminate: the Word and the white of the canvases that still sought the hand of the master.

The last Rembrandt The paintings of the last creative phase show how the brush became the master’s favorite weapon, dipped more and more in the colors of resignation and irony: “Nothing in the world was made to last forever.” The last self-portraits show him thoughtful, while holding the palette, on which the colors can no longer be distinguished (Self-portrait, c. 1665-69). Sometimes his is a bitter smile, like that of the Self-portrait in the likeness of Zeuxis (c. 1662), which is a grotesque portrait. Unlike these canvases, the Self-portrait as the Apostle Paul, in which he holds a Bible, gives meaning to loneliness and the dramas he had faced. Rembrandt returns here to the light of the Word, which his

7.See S. Zuffi, 100 parole per capire Rembrandt, Milan, Mondadori Electa, 2011, 106. 8.See Ibid. LUCIAN LECHINTAN, SJ

mother had rooted in his heart as a child, causing him to affirm with the Apostle: “I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith” (2 Tim 4:7). With his works the artist has become, like Paul, a proclaimer of the Good News. In his creation, he has identified with his characters, with their prayers, defeats, regrets and hopes. In the last phase of his life, he was perhaps aware that if his works were to become famous, this would be due not to formal perfection, but to an unshakable faith in the strength of a new beginning that pervades these same works.

71 Church Numbers in the World

GianPaolo Salvini, SJ

The vitality of the Church and, above all, the faith that animates her pastors and her faithful cannot be measured by numbers and statistics. Only God knows the mysterious and unique relationship that unites him to people who profess themselves Catholic. This is what constitutes the essence of the faith. 72 Yet the Church, like every visible human reality, cannot live outside the dimensions of space and time and should not refrain measuring her own quantitative dimensions in some way, without expecting them to convey more than they can offer. For this reason the Central Office of Statistics of the Church has edited the Pontifical Yearbook 2020 and the Annuarium Statisticum Ecclesiae 2018. First, we report some statistics that help to form an idea of the changes that have occurred in the dimensions of the Church itself and its members. The comparisons were made between 2013 and 2018, that is, for the first 5 years of the pontificate of Pope Francis. In terms of new structures, we see, as of 2019, 4 bishoprics, 1 eparchy, 2 territorial prelatures, 1 apostolic exarchate and 1 area of apostolic administration. The number of bishops in the world has increased from 5,173 to 5,377 (3.9 percent). The biggest increases (more than 4 percent) were in Oceania, the Americas, Asia and Europe, while in Africa they increased 1.4 percent. With regard to baptized Catholics, between 2013 and 2018 there has been a reduction in the relative numbers in European and North American countries and an increase in all

La Civiltà Cattolica, En. Ed. Vol. 4, no. 07 art. 7, 0620: 10.32009/22072446.0720.7 GIANPAOLO SALVINI, SJ

other geographical areas. Catholics in the world in those years increased by almost 6 percent, from 1.254 billion to 1.329 billion, an increase of 75 million. At the end of 2018 Catholics made up just under 18 percent of the world population. This percentage has remained almost unchanged over the years surveyed. To be more precise, the highest percentage is found in the Americas, with 63.7 Catholics per 100 inhabitants, followed by Europe with 39.7 Catholics per 100 inhabitants, Oceania with 26.3 and Africa with 19.4. The lowest incidence is that of Asia (3.3 Catholics per 100 inhabitants), due to the significant number of non-Christian believers on this continent. The distribution of Catholics among the various continents differs greatly from that of the population. In the Americas, for example, the population continues to be around 13.5 percent of 73 the world total, while the number of Catholics has decreased by one percentage point, dropping to 48.3 percent of the world’s Catholic population. The number of Catholics in Asia has grown slightly – from 10.9 to 11.1 percent – but is much lower than the continent’s population (about 60 percent in 2018). Europe yields a population count 4 points lower than that of the Americas (9.6 percent), but its percentage in the Catholic world is lower than that of American countries (21.5 compared to 48.3 percent). The number of priests decreased by 0.3 percent during this five year period, confirming a trend already underway. Between 2013 and 2018, priestly numbers increased by 1,400 in the first two years, and then decreased in the following three years. At the end of 2017, there were 414,582 priests. Encouragingly, they increased in Africa (+14.3 percent) and Asia (+11 percent). In America they remained constant (about 123,000). They decreased in Europe (-7 percent) and Oceania (-1 percent). The distribution of priests in the various continents sees a prevalence of European priests (41.3 percent), whose numbers have decreased greatly in the last three years, followed by American priests. The Asian clergy make up 16.5 percent of the total, the African clergy 11.5 percent and that of Oceania 1.1 percent . A rapidly evolving reality in all continents is that of permanent deacons, who rose from 43,195 in 2013 to 47,504 in 2018, an increase of about 10 percent. CHURCH NUMBERS IN THE WORLD

On the other hand, the number of professed non-priest religious has continued to decrease over the years, and from 2013 to 2018 it decreased by almost 8 percent, from 55,000 to less than 51,000. The exceptions are Africa and Asia, where there has been a certain increase. With regard to the major seminarians there is also a tendency toward a slow decrease. Candidates for the priesthood in the world decreased by 2 percent in the period considered, from 118,251 in 2013 to 115,880 in 2018, with strong decreases in Europe (-15.6 percent) and The Americas (-9.4 percent). The continent that shows an encouraging opposite trend is Africa (+15.6 percent). The drop in the number of professed nuns is cause for concern. They have decreased by 7.5 percent in the 5 years 74 considered. The total number has decreased from 694,000 in 2013 to less than 642,000 in 2018. The decline concerns Europe, Oceania and The Americas, with decreases between -15 percent and -12 percent. On the other hand, there were increases of +9 percent in Africa and +2.6 percent in Asia, so that the relative percentages of European and American religious decreased in the total numbers.

Some considerations We have limited ourselves to a few numerical data, from which, however, we can conclude as to some trend lines. The number of bishops is increasing, both because of the desire to make the Church more Catholic, that is, universal, by creating official structures in every corner of the world, and to make their bishops closer to the faithful. With the exception of Africa – whose Catholicism is younger and more dynamic – and Asia, the number of priests and nuns is constantly decreasing in the regions of “old” Christianity. These are, among other things, the ever more secularized continents, such as Europe and North America, where the number of practicing faithful is decreasing, and so there are fewer vocations. In any case, from the point of view of pastoral activity there is a clear shift toward Africa and Asia as the Church’s increasingly vibrant “new” lands. GIANPAOLO SALVINI, SJ

The rapid growth in the number of permanent deacons could be an indicator of the direction in which to seek new pastoral leaders. For some time now there has been lively discussion about the causes of the crisis in religious life. One element giving rise to reflection concerns the need to assign new responsibilities in the Church to women religious, whose enormous and vital contribution is not matched by suitable representation in the Church’s core structures. There will, however, always be vocations to an alternative form of religious commitment, such as the cloistered life.

75 Modi’s India: Between Hindu Traditionalism and Coronavirus

Giovanni Sale, SJ

Two serious emergencies are currently rocking India. One is medical, the coronavirus emergency. The other is political, and involves changes to citizenship laws. They are of a different nature and concern different areas, even if somehow connected. They are dangerous, insidious developments 76 challenging the survival and unity of the second most populous country in the world and he third largest economy in Asia, after China and Japan. India has a population of about 1.3 billion people, half of whom are under 25 years old. The country has a volatile economy and a large part of the population (mainly rural) lives below the poverty line, yet it is estimated that in 2030 its inhabitants will number more than one and a half billion. This conjecture takes into account the increase in labor flows from the countryside to the cities, and also climate change, which in the not too distant future could cause natural disasters and migration from neighboring countries. In this article we will talk about these aspects separately, even though since January they have crossed paths in the chronology and the emerging tragedy, which are narrated – as the Indian writer Arundhati Roy1 does in her substantial output – one next to the other, one inside the other. In any case, as is evident, the two emergencies together are potentially explosive for a country that is as divided and fragile as India is today.

La Civiltà Cattolica, En. Ed. Vol. 4, no. 07 art. 8, 0620: 10.32009/22072446.0720.8

1.See A. Roy, “The pandemic is a portal”, in Financial Times, March 3, 2020. GIOVANNI SALE, SJ

The new citizenship law While China was fighting the new coronavirus in Wuhan, the Indian government, as early as January 2020, was already in conflict withhundreds of thousands of citizens (mostly Muslims) who were protesting against the approval by Parliament (125 votes in favor and 105 against) of a new citizenship law, the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), which discriminates against Muslims. The legislation that received presidential assent on December 12, 2019, effectively amends the law on Indian citizenship, introducing exceptions for those who belong to six religious groups – Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Janists, Parsees and Christians – and come from Pakistan, Afghanistan and Bangladesh. For 77 these, the procedure required to obtain citizenship is simplified. If before the reform, in fact, to acquirecitizenship a foreigner had to have lived in the country for at least 11 years, now for those categories of people six years are sufficient, that is, almost half the time required for others, first and foremost Muslims. While for the political leader and head of the government Narendra Modi the approval of this law is “ an historic day for India and for the values of solidarity and brotherhood of our nation,” for Derek O’Brien, a member of the opposition, it is an ominous day for Indian democracy. In fact, the law has been strongly opposed both in parliament and in the national press by moderate and left-wing politicians and intellectuals. The law – as human rights bodies have stated repeatedly – discriminates against Muslims residingin India, In particular, Ahmadis from Pakistan and Rohingya from Myanmar, minorities persecuted in their countries of origin, are particularly penalized. International human rights organizations have been unanimous in their opposition to the law, as have major international institutions, particularly the UN and the EU. The European Parliament has tabled six different resolutions condemning the CAA, which, while recognizing India’s right to legislate on this matter, explainhow this legislation is “discriminatory, dangerously divisive, and potentially capable of creating the most serious statelessness crisis in MODI’S INDIA: BETWEEN HINDU TRADITIONALISM AND CORONAVIRUS the world.”2 Furthermore, some resolutions denounce police assaulting peaceful demonstrators. The United Nations High Commissioner also expressed concern about the new law because, as its spokesman Jerem Laurence said, “it would appear to undermine the commitment to equality before the law enshrined in the Constitution of India and India’s obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.”3 Equally strong and clear was the denunciation by the Catholic Church and other Christian communities, which defined this legislation as “openly discriminatory.” The bishops of Gujarat State, in western India, have asked the government to “suspend this measure immediately, until adequate consideration is given to all human aspects related to it, so as to protect the 78 good of the entire human community living in India.”4 According to several analysts, this law perfectly expresses the pro-Hinduist and anti-Muslim orientation followed in recentyears by the government, led by the nationalist 5 Narendra Modi. In fact, for the supporters of the Hindutva,

2.www.agenzianova.com 3.www.corriere.it The international organization Human Rights Watch has published a very detailed 82-page report on this subject, reporting police assaults on defenseless civilians. 4.https://www.vaticannews.va/it.html The Justice Coalition of Religious, a group comprising several religious congregations,has also expressed the same criticism. They have condemnedthe new law as “unconstitutional” because the Fundamental Charter of the State asserts that India “accepts that people of every faith, creed, caste, language and gender are Indian in the same way and without discrimination” (ibid.). 5.Narendra Modi has shaped his image as a strong and reliable leader by leveraging two fundamental elements: the growth of the country’s GDP (despite the great poverty of the poorer classes), making India the third largest economy in Asia, after China and Japan; and Hindu nationalism, a movement that holds together classical nationalism and social and identity traditionalism. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), the political party Modi leads, has the same ideological characteristics. It has such a strong Hindu identity that it pursues as its ultimate goal – even if realistically impossible to achieve – Hindu hegemony over all aspects of the social and political life of the country, to the detriment of 20% of the population that is not part of this social group. Politically, Modi was formed in the ranks of the ultra-nationalist organization of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), which promotes the doctrine of Hindu supremacy (hindutva). This organization plays a very important role in determining the GIOVANNI SALE, SJ

that is, for the Hindu Nationalists who openly support the governing party, erasing Islam from political and social life would improve the identity and unity of the country and social peace. It should be remembered, however, that Islam in India is the religion ofmore than 173 million people and that India is, after Indonesia and Pakistan, the third largest Muslim country in the world by population. This fact alone makes us understand what is at stake in this political dispute, and how Hindu Nationalists do not actually work for the pacification and progress of the country.

The protest against CAA and police violence In India, the first case of Covid-19 was recorded on January 30, immediately after the state visit of President Jair Bolsonaro 79 of Brazil, who was not then worried – neither was Modi – about the effects of the coronavirus on his people’s health. Moreover, the country at that time was too busy preparing for Trump’s state visit, from which considerable economic benefits were expected – in reality, there weren’t any – to take seriously the health emergency, which was already spreading globally. India is “poor and rich, suspended between feudalism and religious fundamentalism, between the caste system and capitalism, governed by extreme right-wing Hindu nationalists,”6 as Ms. Roy wrote. In those crucial days India found itself between two fires: on one side, the effects of the coronavirus were beginning to appear; on the other, the protest, especially by Muslims, against the new citizenship law. In fact, immediately after the passing of the law, millions of Indians had begun to demonstrate against it, accusing the political leadership of violating the Constitution and

national political direction of the government. Modi became Prime Minister in 2014, ending the long hegemony exercised by the Congress Party (center-left) over Indian political life; he was reconfirmed in the same position in 2019. See “Chi è Narendra Modi, il prossimo primo ministro indiano”, in Internazionale, May 16, 2014; R. Heredia, “The Spring Tide of Saffron Power. India between Democracy and Nationalism”, in https://www.laciviltacattolica.com/the- spring-tide-of-saffron-power-india-between-democracy-and-nationalism/ ; A. Burling, Narendra Modi: Prime Minister of India, London, Focus Readers, 2019. 6.See A. Roy, “The pandemic is a portal”, op. cit. MODI’S INDIA: BETWEEN HINDU TRADITIONALISM AND CORONAVIRUS undermining the principle of the secular state. The government reacted immediately to the demonstrations in the streets, banning rallies, blocking mobile networks and arbitrarily detaining people in prison. Particularly brutal was the reaction of the police in the states of Assam and Uttar Pradesh, both with large Islamic populations. In the latter, in particular, the policeransacked the homes of Muslims in retaliation, beating and arresting people. It appears that some 20 protesters died as a result of injuries caused by bullets used by the police, although the police deny firing into the crowd.7 Between February 24 and 26 – while Trump’s visit was underway – New Delhi became the center of the protest against the citizenship law. According to the Indian press, 47 people from both sides lost their lives in the clashes and more than 80 300 were injured.8 These clashes occurred after the regional elections in which the ruling party, the Bharatiya Janata Party – the political wing of the right-wing paramilitary organization Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) founded about a century ago9 – lost political control of the capital and other important regions of the country. According to some witnesses, this was followed bycrowds of Hindu vigilantes attacking Muslims in working-class neighborhoods in northeast New Delhi. At least implicitly they were supported by the police. Mosques, shops and bazaars were set on fire. Many people were savagely beaten. In order to escape the violence of the attackers, thousands

7.Cf. “Gli immigrati, l’islam e Modi”, in www.limesonline.com/rubrica/ india-musulmani-proteste-modi/ P. B. Mehta, “Inde. Une république en déliquescense”, in Courrier international, No. 1531, March 5, 2020, 34. 8.See E. Schmall - S. Saaliq, “Violenza inaudita a New Delhi”, in Internazionale, March 6, 2020, 41. 9.Hinduism does not have the characteristics of an institutional Church, nor a recognized hierarchy. The RSS has attributed itself, especially in recent decades, the decisive role of dictating the doctrinal religious content of Hinduism and of implementing the construction of an authentically Indian state, based on Hinduism. It considers Islam and other religious traditions as confessions extraneous to Indian culture and tradition, and which must therefore be eliminated from the nation. The organization is made up of some 4 million volunteers, who have sworn allegiance to it and often take part in military exercises. GIOVANNI SALE, SJ

took refuge in the city’s cemeteries. “The violence,” writes an Indian source of information, “was undoubtedly religious in nature. It began as clashes between Hindus and Muslims, and resulted in large-scale attacks against Islamic neighborhoods. Houses and shops were set on fire with the cry ‘glory to the god Rama,’ which has become the slogan of Hindu extremists in their ‘punitive actions’ against Muslims.”10 In addition, paramilitary youth forces of the RSS on several occasions attacked Islamic universities, libraries and cultural centers or those considered leftist.11

The nationalist turning point in India For almost half a century after independence from Britain and the so-called “bipartition” (1947), right-wing traditionalist 81 political movements and parties supported by the RSS have played an entirely marginal role in politics. The Congress Party – secular and progressive in spirit – instrumental in establishing democracy and the nation’s constitution, during those years it was in power (1952-1977), did everything to put an end to any attempt at conservative restoration and return to the past, as the Hindutva supporters wanted. The situation began to change in the 1990s, when Hindu traditionalists began to gain ground and visibility inthe public arena. The destruction of the Ayodhya mosque in 1992 was a sign of their revitalization. This event strengthened the ultra- traditionalists throughout the country in their plan to build an authentically Hindu nation, i.e. one with a strong identity,

10.“Attacchi in India”, in Internazionale, February 28, 2020, 31. In the videos posted on the net we see agents passively witnessing the beating of Muslim men by Hindu groups, or policemen forcing Muslims to sing the Indian national anthem. 11.In December, the library of the prestigious Jamia Millia Islamia was attacked and vandalized. Subsequently, they targeted some important universities where demonstrations against the government had taken place. In particular, we remember the Jawharlal Nehru University (JNU) of New Delhi, a university specializing in the humanities, whose students have a reputation of being progressive, i.e. left-wing, and which is hostile to the nationalist direction taken by the government. In this case, adormitory of the university was invaded, and the students, considered parasites and “enemies of the nation,” werethreatened and beaten. MODI’S INDIA: BETWEEN HINDU TRADITIONALISM AND CORONAVIRUS even at the cost of violating the Constitution. In fact, for years the RSS had been repeating that the 16th-century Babri Masjid mosque of Ayodhya stood in the place where the Hindu deity Rama was born. For the nationalists such a place required an important Hindu temple, not a mosque built by an invading Muslim conqueror. For years members of the Bharatiya Janata Party traveled far and wide through the cities of India to demand that the mosque be torn down and the god Rama be once again worshipped on the site. In December 1992 a crowd of RSS and BJP sympathizers demolished the mosque under the eyes of the state police, who did nothing to prevent it. Later, religious uprisings broke out throughout India, particularly in Mumbai, and 2,000 people were killed. “BJP’s obsession with Babri Masjid was bloody and 82 divisive, but it brought them new political capital,”12 and not only in the rural areas of the population.13 In 1996 the party formed a national government for the first time. However, the political turning point came in May 2014 when the BJP won the general election (with 31% of the votes), and its leader, now very popular among the people, was appointed Prime Minister of India. The Congress Party’s historical debacle, which was fully expected, was due to various factors: first of all, the involvement of many of its members in various episodes of political corruption and scandals of various kinds; secondly, the continuance, after about half a century of power, of a now despised family structure that was part of the Gandhi-Nehru political dynasty; finally, the lack of charisma of the Congress Party leader, Rahul, the last scion of the Gandhi dynasty. That year the fact is thatthere was a historic turning point in Indian politics, which moveddecisively to the right in a nationalist sense, even though the prime minister committed himself to improving the country’s economic conditions and

12.S. Subramanian, “Il Paese spaccato a metà dalla furia induista”, in Internazionale, March 6, 2020, 42. 13.Many Indians living in the U.S. and occupying important positions approve the conservative policy of Modi’s BJP: see F. Rampini, “Ma l’India è davvero tutta un’altra cosa?”, in D Young, la Repubblica, March 21, 2020, 98. GIOVANNI SALE, SJ

making India one of the most advanced economies in the East. This was only partially successful. In any case Modi was reconfirmed in his office after the 2019 elections, which saw his party (in coalition with others) victorious.14

The register of citizenship According to some analysts, India is facing one of the most serious situations in its 72 years as a free, secular and democratic country. “Its institutions,” writes journalist Samanth Subramanian, “have been under pressure to align themselves with Modi’s decisions. The opposition is weak and shabby. And there is more in sight: the hindutva, in its broadest expression, will only dismantle the constitution and destroy the fabric of liberal democracy. The constitutional subtleties are incompatible 83 with the BJP project, which wants a country where people are classified and evaluated according to their faith.”15 The Indian Constitution was drafted by the founders of modern India between 1946 and 1949 to hold together a vast and heterogeneous country. They tried as far as possible to eliminate the injustices and inequalities of the past. In particular, the document was animated by the desire to treat different castes and religions with full equality.16 To achieve this objective, one of the main premises was that the state should be secular and that citizenship should be separated from confessional membership. For this reason, the exclusion of Muslims, decided

14.In August 2019, after obtaining a second mandate, Modi unexpectedly removed the special autonomy of the state of Jammu and Kashmir, a region with a Muslim majority whose territory was divided into two parts and entrusted to the control of the central government. To prevent unrest troops were sent to an already heavily militarized territory and the internet connection was suspended: see “India cancella l’autonomia del Kashmir”, in www.repubblica.it ; A. Roy, “La politica fascista che minaccia l’India”, in Internazionale, March 6, 2020, 36. 15.S. Subramanian, “The country split in half by the Hindu fury”, op. cit., 40. 16.The caste system has been formally abolished, as well as untouchability (Art. 17 cost.), but according to a UN human rights committee, the so-called “caste-free” (the dalits) – who would be about 200 million – are still discriminated against in India with regard to access to places of worship, hospitals, schools and other public services. Yet both the President of India, Ram Nath Kovind, and Prime Minister Modi belong to this social class: see “India”, in Atlante geopolitico 2018, Rome, Istituto dell’Enciclopedia Treccani, 2018, 457. MODI’S INDIA: BETWEEN HINDU TRADITIONALISM AND CORONAVIRUS

by the Citizenship Amendment Act, violates one of the central points of the Fundamental Charter of the State. The CAA, it has been pointed out, appears even more destabilizing when seen together with other recent government measures – the formation of a national citizens’ register and a national population register – which aim to define who is to be considered a full Indian citizen.17 The government started creating a register of citizens five years ago in the north-eastern Assam region, an autonomous region bordering Bangladesh. It has a porous border; a large number of migrants pass through it in both directions. According to some estimates, there are around six million illegal aliens in the region.18 The fear is that ancient cultural and religious clashes will reopen between the Bengali and Assamese communities where 84 many Muslims live. In addition, migrants in Assam are accused by the local population of taking work away from the natives and using state services without having the right to do so. Previous governments and the Supreme Court of India had ruled that a register of citizens should be established to distinguish residents from the many immigrants. In this regard, it should be remembered that it is not always easy for Indians to prove their citizenship. In fact,, only 100 million people in the country hold a passport; other documents issued locally are usually considered unreliable. It is assumed that the BJP has relaunched the project of a citizenship register as a political tactic, in order to sow discord among religious communities and strengthen the Hindu element at the expense of the Muslim one. Thus, in 2014, at an election rally in Assam, Modi declared that while the Hindu migrants would be welcomed, the other infiltrators would be sent back to Bangladesh. This idea was constantly supported and implemented by the government – both central and regional – over the following years. In 2015, when the registration of citizens in Assam began, families spent all their savings to secure the necessary

17.Cf. S. Subramanian, “Il Paese spaccato a metà dalla furia induista”, op. cit., 43; A. Roy, “The pandemic is a portal”, op. cit. 18.See www.wired.it GIOVANNI SALE, SJ

documents. Many, unable to obtain them, committed suicide. In those years, the courts set up to control the files rejected the majority of the requests coming from Muslims (possibly 90%) and accepted, instead, the majority of those coming from Hindu immigrants (40%).19 It seems that the government now wants to gather all these foreigners, considered illegal, in internment camps to be built in that region. One, with triple walls, has already been built. The Assam population register was published in August 2019. Approximately two million people discovered that they were not on those lists and that they were considered “illegal immigrants,” and were therefore either to be deported or to be concentrated in internment camps. The government was more than satisfied with the results 85 achieved in Assam, and stated that “ it intends to compile a Pan- Indian register of citizens, extending its power of exclusion to the entire population of 1.3 billion inhabitants.”20 This seems unlikely, not least because considering non-Hindu as non-Indians goes against the recent history of the country, against its Constitution, against justice and against international law. In any case, four months after the publication of the Assam citizenship register, the Indian Parliament voted on the citizenship law we are discussing. The global health crisis, linked to coronavirus, as well as the numerous protests in the country so far have somehow curbed this ominous trend. In fact, India will have much more to deal with in the coming months. It seems that the “population register,” which will collect personal data on India’s habitual residents, is due to be published in September. “Even this seemingly passive population count can turn into a new population sieve.”21

Coronavirus arrives in India In the first months of 2020, the coronavirus epidemic was spreading from China where it had originated to the northern part of the world, “unravelling along the routes of intercontinental

19.See S. Subramanian, “Il Paese spaccato a metà dalla furia induista”, op. cit., 44. 20.Ibid. 21.Ibid. MODI’S INDIA: BETWEEN HINDU TRADITIONALISM AND CORONAVIRUS traffic.”22 It struck mercilessly the European Union and the United States, and at first spared the poorest parts of the southern hemisphere. In this way the virus, besides causing death and fear, blocked the very engine of world capitalism. This gave many countries, including India, the possibility of preparing for a future health emergency. This did not happen, and while European countries were preparing the first measures against the epidemic, the long-awaited state visit of Trump to India took place. In those same days (February 24-25) in New Delhi the bloody clashes we mentioned took place. On March 11, the World Health Organization officially declared the current epidemic a pandemic. Two days later the Indian Health Minister said on television that the coronavirus was not a “health emergency.” But the virus had long since spread to 86 the country, where there had also been deaths. On March 24, at 8 p.m., Modi appeared on TV to announce that, as of midnight, the whole of India would be under a form of blockadeand that all citizens would have to stay at home. The “lockdown” was then implemented following the model adopted in Europe. The total blockade was a shock to many. It revealed the enormous injustices and fragilities that exist within Indian society and that are often hidden. “While the rich and the bourgeoisie took refuge in their residences protected by walls,” says Roy, “our cities and megalopolises began to expel their workers, often immigrants, as if they were an unwanted outgrowth. Many were dismissed or sent away by their landlords, and millions of poor, hungry, thirsty, young and old, men, women, children, sick people [...] began a long march to their villages of origin. They walked for days [...]. Some died along the way.”23 For the country this was the largest migration on foot since the partition of the Indian continent. The police deployed on the streets used batons and firearms against those who did not observethe isolation regulations. Some Indian websites in those days denounced such measures, considering them excessive: “They are more drastic measures

22.“L’ora più chiara”, in Limes, No. 3, 2020, 10. 23.A. Roy, “L’altra pandemia”, in Internazionale, April 10, 2020, 18. GIOVANNI SALE, SJ

than those imposed in China and Italy.”24 The decision to impose isolation on 1.3 billion people with a few hours’ notice and without a prearranged plan provoked much criticism against the Modi government. The leader then apologized on TV, saying he was forced by the emergency to adopt a solution of this kind. On the same March 24, the government promised food assistance to the poorest people. “No one will be hungry,” said Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman. Wouldfive extra kilos of rice and a kilo of legumes per family be enough, or a thousand rupees for the elderly, the disabled and widows, or other subsidies of this kind to effectively help millions of people who have lost their jobs and are desperate to find one after the crisis? The really serious problem is that of health care, which is very precarious throughout India due to a lack of public funds. 87 Ordinary health services are almost all suspended – you don’t just die of Covid-19! – because hospitals are now mostly full ofcoronavirus patients. In New Delhi, cancer patients live on the streets, near the hospitals from which they were driven out, hoping to receive some treatment.25 The health crisis has exacerbated the economic crisis. The political crisis, however, apparently continues as before. “The regime media have included the story of Covid-19 in their poisonous campaign against the Muslims. They have discovered that an organization called Tablighi jamaat, which had organized a rally in New Delhi before the total blockade was imposed, ‘is spreading the contagion far and wide.’ They use this absurd news to blame and demonize Muslims. The general tone suggests that they invented the virus and are deliberately spreading it as a form of jihad.”26 Whatis the state of the health emergency now in India? According to estimates in the press, the number of people infected seems to have increased considerably in recent days, as

24.www.scroll.in/latest/961511/covid-19/ Cfr A. Dey, “Inde. Piégés sans ressources à New Delhi”, in Courrier International, No. 1535, April 2, 2020, 28. 25.See ibid. 26.A. Roy, “L’altra pandemia” op. cit., 20. MODI’S INDIA: BETWEEN HINDU TRADITIONALISM AND CORONAVIRUS well as the number of deaths.27 According to data from the World health Organization on June 11, the number of virus positives is 286,579, while the number of dead has exceeded 8,102.28 This increase in the number of infected people is due not to an alleged genetic mutation of the virus, as has been said, but to its greater spread throughout the country, when millions of people left the cities to return to their country villages. “Without means, in full lockdown, those millions of desperate people have laboriously spread the virus at every step and every night spent outdoors throughout the country.”29 The so-called “India model” (for the low number of infected people) was shattered. The government had to intervene, organizing dozens of special trains around the immense country in order to collect and transport the shramiks, that is, the impoverished workers paid per day. In the meantime, 88 however, the virus had spread everywhere. Undoubtedly at this moment the Indian government, like many others, is called upon to respond to an unprecedented health and economic crisis (it seems that 122 million Indians have lost their jobs as a result of the lockdown). It is up to those who have the leadership of the country to work hard to get it out of the emergency, and this is only possible with the collaboration of all citizens and other political forces. The teaching of Mahatma Gandhi, who advised politicians to think before making important decisions about the most vulnerable people and ask themselves whether their measures will improve the lives of these people and make them freer, is surely relevant today.30

27.See www.avvenire.it/mondo/pagine/india-quarantena-sull-albero/ The lockdown was declared on March 24 and due to expire on 5 May but was then extended. 28.Given the seriousness of the health situation, Modi, in a speech to the unified networks TV, announced the launch of a package of initiatives amounting to 10% of the local GDP, or 266 billion dollars, intended to help the new unemployed and those who have no income due to the coronavirus, but also to support businesses. See R. Bultrini, “Aid to the poor and industries. Modi exploits Covid to create the new India”, in la Repubblica, May 19, 2020. 29.A. Nicastro, “I lavoratori in marcia verso casa hanno contagiato tutta l’India”, in Corriere della Sera, May 23, 2020. 30.See H. Mander, “L’India si è fermata e i più poveri moriranno”, in Internazionale, April 3, 2020, 27. The Letter To The Galatians: ‘The Truth of the Gospel’

Giancarlo Pani, SJ

The Letter to the Galatians is an exceptional New Testament document. It was written by Paul at a time of great anguish, because a fervent community that the Apostle had worked hard to establish and to which he remained closely attached, 89 found itself being misled by Judaizers. These had come from the People of Israel and had accepted faith in Christ Jesus, but had not abandoned the observance of the Law, Jewish traditions and circumcision as indispensable conditions of salvation. For them, it is the Law that saves, not Christ. They considered him a marginal agent in the economy of salvation. For the first time, the Letter to the Galatians addressed this new and very delicate situation, which was a matter of life or death for the nascent Church. The Judaizers forced Paul to reflect on an essential issue: Do we have to become Jews to be Christians? The Apostle gradually came to a sharpened awareness that culminates in Chapter 3 of the Letter. This will be fundamental to the Gospel proclamation: “All of you who were baptized in Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is no longer Jew or Greek; there is no longer slave or free; there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ.”1 It is also, in absolute terms, the first reflection on the value of faith for salvation. The Gospels came later and were written following the pioneering work done by the Apostle. Hence the passionate character of the Letter,, its dense and, to a degree, violent exposition . Certainly, from a theological point of view, it is an expansion and an explanation of Paul’s thought,

La Civiltà Cattolica, En. Ed. Vol. 4, no. 07 art. 9, 0620: 10.32009/22072446.0720.9

1.Gal 3:27-28; cf. 1 Cor 12:13; Col 3:11; see also Phlm 16. THE LETTER TO THE GALATIANS: ‘THE TRUTH OF THE GOSPEL’ which matured through years of apostolic mission. For this reason the doctrinal treatment is emotional, frantic and nervous. It lacks the detachment associated with a measured discourse, although such a “fiery” way of approaching the themes guarantees interest, concreteness and an immediate relationship with the reader.

The Letter to the Galatians and the Letter to the Romans After the foundation of the community of the Galatians some time before, events in the community had stirred the Apostle and caused him to intervene. On the one hand, it was a time of rediscovery and inner reflection, in which he re- lived his vocation; on the other, Paul found himself challenged precisely in his mission as Apostle. This could not but lead to his witness of faith, which united writer and addressees, and 90 which included, in addition to strictly spiritual guidance, the biblical tradition of the Old Testament. Its final conclusion was that Christian life, in its most essential aspects, is freedom in peace, in communion, in harmonious growth. Compared to the Letter to the Romans, written shortly afterward, here we have only a first rough outline, but the theme is the same as that which is treated in that Letter in a measured manner, addressed to readers whom Paul does not know personally, amongst whom there is no particular situation of conflict. So the tone there is calm and serene, and serves to guarantee the veracity of the exposition, but again it is not a clear and limpid discourse because the Letter to the Romans is far from easy to understand. This is the point. In the existential crisis created by the Judaizers, the Letter to the Galatians wants to speak of “the essential,” to clarify in what the salvation given by Christ consists and to focus on the essentials that define the Christian and the qualities of Christian life. The Letter is therefore fundamental for us too, for Christians of every generation and of all times. It presents us with the essential, at the risk of overshadowing other important issues but with an enormous advantage, which is that of understanding what counts, what is the foundation, and also what is secondary and can therefore follow a different and marginal development. GIANCARLO PANI, SJ

Pope Francis and the Letter to the Galatians During the 2019 Synod for the Amazon, Pope Francis intervened several times in the discussions, drawing significantly from the Letter to the Galatians, though without expressly mentioning it. He spoke of the Amazonian conflict that concerned the assembly and the difficulty of finding solutions. Then Francis made two reflections on the “overflowing” or “spilling over” – in Spanish desborde – of God’s mercy, and referred to two fundamental facts of salvation history. The first is the “overflowing” of redemption: “It was not enough for God to regulate things by means of the Law; he had to resort to Grace, which is an overflow; it is that ‘more abundantly’ in the action of God.”2 This is the underlying 91 theme of the Letter to the Galatians: the overcoming of the Mosaic Law through faith in the Lord Jesus. The Judaizers considered the Law an incontrovertible reality, because it came from God and was His gift to the Chosen People. There was also a very authoritative precedent that confirmed this doctrine: the life and work of Jesus who fully observed the prescriptions of the Law. He was part of the Jewish people: he was circumcised, prayed the Psalms, kept the ritual prescriptions, the Sabbath (with a few exceptions, carefully motivated). Therefore, even converts from paganism were obliged to observe the Law in order to be saved. Grace was grafted on to observance of the Law, which served as its foundation. The second reflection concerns the assembly in Jerusalem (cf. Acts 15), called to clarify the relationship between the Mosaic Law and its prescriptions for those who came from paganism. This is what “happened in the Church in the face of the conflict between Jewish and pagan traditions. In that case the questions were not resolved by ‘disciplining’ the pagans, but the Church made a ‘qualitative leap,’ a leap of overflow, opening itself to the action of the Spirit.”3 In that assembly the Spirit determined the unity of the Church through the recognition

2.D. Fares, “The heart of ‘Querida Amazonia’: ‘Overflowing en route’” Civ. Catt. En. May, 2020, https://www.laciviltacattolica.com/the-heart-of-querida- amazonia-overflowing-en-route/ 3.Ibid. THE LETTER TO THE GALATIANS: ‘THE TRUTH OF THE GOSPEL’

of the “truth of the Gospel” of Paul (Gal 2:5.14) against those who distorted it. Thus Paul’s Gospel proclamation is the same as that of the apostles, and, as a result, Peter and Paul divided their fields of mission – one for the Jews and the other for the Gentiles – with the commitment of a collection for the Mother Church of Jerusalem. If Jewish traditions had been adopted as a foundation, the Church would have become a “ghetto.” In this way the Christian community was built by the Spirit as the universal, “Catholic” Church. In his address to the Synod, Francis grasped two aspects of the central point of St. Paul’s Letter to the Galatians, its power in the order of salvation, and pointed them out as examples of listening to the Spirit to resolve conflicts. 92 The Letter to the Galatians and the story of Heinrich Schlier In order to grasp the strength of Galatians and the impact it can have on the conscience of a believer, one can remember an event that marked the life of an extraordinary exegete of the Pauline letter, Heinrich Schlier. He lived in the last century (1900-78) and taught New Testament and History of the Ancient Church at the Theological University of Bonn. In 1949, he wrote a commentary on the Letter to the Galatians for the prestigious Protestant series Meyers Kommentar, of which it was the seventh volume. The coomentary was a great success and numerous editions appeared (1951, 1962, 1965, 1971) until the 1970s, when – in a very unusual turn of events – it was no longer published. Something unexpected had happened, a sign of God’s activity. Professor Schlier, a Protestant evangelical, had begun to comment on the Letter to the Galatians, allowing himself to be deeply involved in Paul’s drama and, once his work of interpretation had been completed, he discovered that he had become Catholic. The exegete, confronted with such intense and dramatic pages that were so true and provocative, had radically questioned himself, had suffered in his own person the passion of Paul, and at the end of that effort he found himself to be no longer as he was before. His faith in Christ was also the faith of the apostolic Church. Schlier had discovered the value and GIANCARLO PANI, SJ

importance of the tradition of the great Church, a disconcerting condition for the Protestant mentality. The volume in which he recounts his own spiritual story is surprising.4 Schlier then began commenting on the Letter to the Romans, which Paul had written immediately after the Letter to the Galatians, almost as if to continue and follow the Apostle’s spiritual journey in its entirety. But when the work was finished, the text was not accepted in the Protestant series. It was the Catholic publisher Herder who welcomed it, in 1977, in the 5 biblical commentaries series, Theologische Kommentare. History usually teaches the opposite. Luther became a “reformer” after commenting on the Letter to the Romans in 1515-16 and then the Letter to the Galatians in 1516- 17. The origins of Protestantism are precisely here. Luther 93 followed Paul’s original itinerary in the opposite direction. After having taught the Letter to the Romans in Wittenberg, he commented on the Letter to the Galatians, that is, he moved from the serene, calm and objective exposition to the fiery, frantic and violent text. Throughout his life Luther retained the impetus that would make him a reformer. He commented several times on the Letter to the Galatians, published at least three editions (1519, 1531, 1535) with dozens of reprints, and found in the Apostle’s texts the solution to the greatest problem that grips human conscience, What is salvation? Is it the work of human endeavor? And who is the protagonist of salvation? Luther never hid his passion and love for the Letter to the Galatians. On the contrary, after having studied it for almost all of his life, he even said what can only be said about the person you love the most: the Letter to the Galatians is “my bride,” “mein Keth von Bor.”6

4.See H. Schlier, Kurze Rechenschaft, in K. Hard (ed.), Bekenntnis zur katholischen Kirche mit Beiträgen von M. Giessner, G. Klünder, H. Schlier, R. Goethe, Würzburg, Echter, 1955, 169-192. 5.H. Schlier, Der Römerbrief, Freiburg i. Br. - Basel - Vienna, Herder, 1977. 6.See M. Luther, Tischreden 1 (Weimarer Ausgabe), Weimar, H. Böhlaus, 1912, No. 146, 69, 18-19. THE LETTER TO THE GALATIANS: ‘THE TRUTH OF THE GOSPEL’

The structure of the Letter to the Galatians The structure of the Letter follows a rhetorical scheme: after a prologue (1:1-10), there is a narrative part where the vocation of Paul on the road to Damascus is recalled (1:11- 2:16) The narrative then passes (2:17-21) to an argumentative development that has as its theme faith and justification, with a demonstration according to Scripture and the living faith of Abraham, and with the comparison between the two economies of salvation based on the Old Covenant (3:1-4:31). The conclusions follow: Christ freed us to be free, hence the exercise of faith working in love (5:1-6:10). The Letter ends with an affectionate farewell in which Paul calls the Galatians “brothers” (6:11-18). The text, consciously or not, follows the path of a legal 94 oration in defense. However, there is no literary development. Paul is an apostle before he is a writer, and he is a writer only in the function of his ministry as an apostle. Again, he is an apostle with that history and that vocation and with an inability to look from outside that vocation, in a detached way, at his own life. In his vocation and mission he is alone; he is not just any Jew who has become a Christian; he is a believer who has gone through the Jewish experience to the end. He has tested its illusions of completeness, before committing himself to the Lord. Moreover, he is a theologian, and therefore the cases of the apostolic ministry are not only solved in a far- sighted pastoral perspective (which can be Peter’s role), but he explores them to their roots. He grasps them in the light of possible consequences, as well as in the possible premises and implications, in the salvific structure that since the beginning of time refers to them. This is the existential situation that underlies the Letter to the Galatians.

The Gospel and the Old Testament Paul’s aim in his Letter to the Galatians is to define what is essential and inalienable for the believer, faith in the Risen Lord and his grace. Such an aim, even without explicitly wanting to do so, can have a paradoxical consequence. It may lead to abandoning everything else, that is, to erasing the continuity GIANCARLO PANI, SJ

of history in order to untie the crucial knot, the moment of faith. A rejection of the Old Testament may even emerge, or at least one might think that in this way it is overcome. At times it has been said that the Gospel is complete in itself, is sufficient in itself, and is an absolute beginning. Thus it was believed that the Old Testament could be set aside, and therefore there was the danger of losing the feeling of that beginning, in a continuity within which it detaches itself in relation to the historical development that precedes it. In this way that absolute origin has been relativized. On the other hand, it should not be forgotten that the Old Testament is the seed of the New: salvation history has in it that “beginning” (Gen 1:1) which is the very mystery of God. 95 The thesis of the Letter The Letter to the Galatians demonstrates a thesis: the equating of Paul’s mission with that of the Twelve and at the same time an independence in communion (chap. 1-2). The argument involves questions of principle, but is based on historical data. The facts are recalled to the extent that they serve the thesis, and the rest remains outside. Consequently, it is impossible to reconstruct the entire sequence of events, even if we use the Acts of the Apostles, a theologically conditioned historical document that can be compared with Galatians. Though unilateral, the Letter remains a first-hand document. The autobiographical content is remotely inspired by the accusation made against Paul of preaching a “gospel” that has been adapted to please men.7 The long exposition that follows aims to respond to this accusation – which has a personal character – giving proofs of this insinuation based on Paul’s life, as it was known to others. It is precisely a question of showing how not only was Paul a persecutor rather than a disciple of the Church, but that his Christian journey consisted in abandoning an obedience to God, which was a natural way of reacting for people imbued

7.See Gal 1:10. The accusation is so insistent that in this verse “men” are mentioned three times. THE LETTER TO THE GALATIANS: ‘THE TRUTH OF THE GOSPEL’ with a sense of profound fidelity to what they viewed as God’s authentic revelation. On the road to Damascus, in the turning to obedience in faith, he receives the immediate guidance of the Spirit of God. Hence the continual recourse to expressions that take up allusions to human interests, supported – according to his adversaries – by Paul in his preaching, which instead effectively conforms to the spirit of Judaism and the needs of his adversaries. The fact is that Paul – and he alone, not really the others, much less his adversaries – had to pay the price of human loneliness and poverty in the biblical sense, and all the paradoxes that God imposed on him whom he reserved for himself from his mother’s womb and whom he called freely (1:15). It is certain that “the gospel according to man” (1:11) 96 indicates the symbiosis of parental affection, nationalism, cultural patriotism, but also obedience to the divine will which is fulfilled in Israel, where obedience to Law takes place, a Law that is, yes, the word of God, but is also the text that defines civil coexistence and the institutions of the people; and where the authentic encounter with God who manifests himself has as its foundation not the cross of Jesus Christ, but the belonging to a consenting community. In the Israelite there has always been – before Christ, in the time of Paul (and also in our day) – a pride in being a member of the chosen people, a pride that has a foundation in faith, and yet it can also exist on its own, regardless of faith and even denying it. (Note the Israelite who defines himself as an “atheist” and who rightly considers himself a “Jew”). Solidarity, at least moral solidarity, with the history of one’s own nation is a spontaneous human feeling, which is ordinarily completely interwoven – in personal memories, culture and language – with that historical heritage. Moreover, one has to consider the way in which Peter himself and the Twelve welcomed the Gospel proclamation. In fact, they received it in a communion of life with the Lord Jesus, in the condition of friends, of those who eat and talk together, live side by side on a daily basis, who were direct witnesses of his words. This is the natural path for an GIANCARLO PANI, SJ

meaningful discipleship, where the most difficult knots are untied in conversation with the Master; instead, the personal confrontation of the Lord with Paul took place, and still takes place, in exceptional circumstances, as a lightning strike, as revelation,8 but never with the familiarity of a serene dialogue between people conversing on the same level. A human experience of living with the Lord: this is the way of accessing the Gospel that was granted to the Twelve (therefore they are called “pillars,” 2:9), but was not experienced by Paul. The true point is that even those who have known Christ according to the flesh (cf. 2 Cor 5:16) must now, like Paul, live out a purely spiritual relationship with him. He is now the Lord, the Κyrios, and involves his people in a communion of Spirit and no longer of daily life. Hence Paul’s condition, precisely in 97 its solitary singularity, has become, so to speak, normative for every believer.

8.Gal 1:12; 1 Cor 15:8; 2 Cor 12:2-9. Death in the Digital Age

Giovanni Cucci, SJ

Our ambivalent relationship with death A revealing test of how much digital technology has changed our way of life is our relationship with time. It has been established that our awareness of time diminishes as we navigate; we find ourselves at the end of the day without being aware of its actual 98 duration, just as it is equally difficult to remember what we saw during the hours spent in front of the screen. Everything seems to flatten out in the instant, with no memory and no sense of duration. This concentration on the present dimension of time was not born with the web, but is part of a more general cultural climate that has profoundly affected our relationship with time. Our relationship with death is an emblematic benchmark. Until the 19th century, life expectancy on average did not exceed 30 years. Those who lived to 50 years had generally already seen the death of their parents, spouse and most of their children. But familiarity with death led to a proactive attitude toward life, because it was animated by the perspective of the afterlife, for which the present was anticipation and preparation. It also offered a sense of continuity with loved ones, a tradition and a task that those who remained were called to continue. Now flattened on a merely horizontal plane, today death has become “wild” – to quote Philippe Ariès’ famous expression – it is no longer part of the cultural landscape, and from being a step along the way, it has become the end of the line: “If there is no longer anything on the other side, death is no longer conceivable [...]. In the 21st century, [...] the claim to the right to die with

La Civiltà Cattolica, En. Ed. Vol. 4, no. 07 art. 10, 0620: 10.32009/22072446.0720.10 GIOVANNI CUCCI, SJ

dignity and the awareness of the question of euthanasia are inscribed in the representation of a shameful death because it marks the defeat of the individual as the builder of the self.”1 On the other hand, when something is removed from ordinary life, it ends up entering human existence in another form. The fantasy version of death attracts young audiences especially. This can be seen in shows and narratives related to the afterlife, such as vampirism, or the horror genre. Stephenie Meyer’s novel Twilight (the first in a series of four, all crowned by great popular success), which tells the love story between a girl and a boy-vampire, had sold more than 17 million copies by the time the movie series commenced in 2008, which further contributed to its growing popularity. Vampires – a popular focus of novels in the latter half of the 99 19th century – have a characteristic denied to human beings, immortality. They have a supernatural character where the divine has given way to the demonic. The vampire is a nocturnal being. It despises the light and fills itself with darkness. It is a hybrid of human and animal – the bat, in turn a hybrid of bird and mouse – and brings death, or rather entraps humans, shaping them in the image and likeness of the vampire. But in today’s new narratives vampires cease to be something disturbing; they have the features of a teenager with whom you fall in love. They no longer live at night, but during the day. They don’t live in a gloomy castle, but attend the local high school. And, above all, they protect the people they fall in love with, as a sort of new guardian angel, shaped according to the cultural features of the 21st century. Another myth enjoying great success, and undoubtedly more disturbing, is that of zombies, beings generated by a global catastrophe The stories that characterize them are ludicrous. There is no real plot, but this does not affect their popularity: “In the end what produces the zombies is death alone,

1.C. Ternynck, L’uomo di sabbia. Individualismo e perdita di sé, Milan, Vita e Pensiero, 2011, 109. Cf. G. Cucci, “La morte, cifra dell’esistere umano. Un approccio filosofico”, in Civ. Catt. 2017 IV 131-144. DEATH IN THE DIGITAL AGE inexplicable, anonymous, and elsewhere definitely meaningless and impossible to ritualize, a death that is simply meaningless.”2 Zombies and above all the extraordinary and lasting success of this narrative genre, which attracted notice in 1968 with George Romero’s film – the first of a series of six – The Night of the Living Dead, reflect the tragic ambiguity of our era. They are the proclaimers of an unprecedented epidemic of a cultural kind. They are the sign of a civilization that has failed in its relationship with death. It is no coincidence that to destroy them one must destroy not the heart, but the brain. Zombies are the living dead; they have left the cemeteries to occupy the places of ordinary life; they represent the disappearance of the sacred, of the separation between the world of the living and that of the dead. Like humans, they are insatiable consumers who have no 100 peace and spread corruption and death everywhere. The success of these narratives in the minds of the youth comes from an unspoken need to talk about death and its relationship with life. The great popularity of this theme, as has been noted, runs parallel to its complete absence from ordinary life, even from preaching.

Death on the web The theme of death acquires a further value in the internet age. The data accumulated on social media and search engines form a person’s digital profile. So a person continues to be present in a very different way from the fictitious masquerades –an 3 avatar, or a virtual character – of Second life. It is the image of the same person with whom you have lived, who interacts, talks and answers any questions arising from those who surf the web, always available a click away. In 1997 the sociologist Carla Sofka introduced the term thanatology to indicate the influence that new technologies have on the representation of death. In the web a dead person continues to be present, to communicate in a visible way through videos,

2.P. Ortoleva, Miti a bassa intensità. Racconti, media, vita quotidiana, Turin, Einaudi, 2019, 260. 3.Cf. A. Spadaro, “’Second life’: il desiderio di un’‘altra vita’”, in Civ. Catt. 2007 III 266-278. GIOVANNI CUCCI, SJ

images and texts. Digital technology makes it possible to create a “griefbot,” an automatic channel (bot) used by those who remain to relieve the pain (grief) of the disappearance of a loved one: “Let’s think of Luka, the mobile app that allows you to dialogue with the digital specter of Roman Mazurenko, a 27-year-old Belarusian who died in a car accident. Eugenia Kuyda, Luka’s inventor, has made possible what is imagined in the episode Be Right Back (2013) of the futuristic television series Black Mirror. One may continue to dialogue with the dear departed by virtue of a technology that, reproducing the communicative style he adopted on social networks, automatically processes the answers to the questions of the living, ‘imagining’ the likely reactions that he would have had if he were still alive.”4 Even if you do not resort to such sophisticated designs, the 101 ability to access the deceased’s account allows you to empathize with that person and interact on social media as if he or she were still alive. As far as Italy is concerned, the story of Luca Borgogni, who died on July 8, 2017, is significant. “The mother discovered – with the help of her daughter and without Luca’s consent – the password of her son’s Facebook account and for months she wrote daily posts in the first person [...], as if Luca himself was still writing.”5 When Facebook found out about the death, it closed the account, despite the protests of the mother, who claimed the possibility of inheriting her son’s profile in a similar way to any other property of a deceased family member. However, seeing messages and posts composed by a dead person, while it may be comforting for a family member, can instead have a traumatic impact on others. Death remains a public fact, and in social media it is so in an even more obvious way, and it is impossible to satisfy the needs of all those involved. The question also remains whether the deceased would wish to continue to survive in this form or whether he or she would

4.D. Sisto, “Digital Death. Le trasformazioni digitali della morte e del lutto”, in Lessico di etica pubblica 1 (2018) 55. See C. Sofka, “Social Support ‘Internetworks’, Caskets for Sale, and More: Thanatology and the Information Superhighway”, in Death Studies 6 (1997) 553-574. 5.D. Sisto, La morte si fa social. Immortalità, memoria e lutto nell’epoca della cultura digitale, Turin, Bollati Boringhieri, 2018, 97. DEATH IN THE DIGITAL AGE not prefer to die digitally. This is why many digital platforms provide for the deletion of data after learning of the user’s death or after a prolonged period of inactivity (for Twitter 6 months, for Google 18 months). Facebook has developed a commemorative profile so family or friends can continue to manage the user’s account data after their death.6 Another major problem is the processing of work data (notes, business programs, accounting) that are found on the servers of companies around the world and of which family members are mostly unaware.

Death on the web: possibility and perplexity “Those who die come back again”: the updated version of this saying, which until recently was mainly a casual observation, can summarize the epochal change in the relationship with the dead 102 made possible by the web. With the advent of social media, death ceases to be the subject of a taboo, rarely mentioned in public life, and becomes a topic shared by an increasing number of users. There are sites that allow those who, in their will, wish to continue to be present, to share data, messages, videos, songs, in an interactive way: “Advanced and interactive digital funerary services are already seen by many operators as the business of the future, alongside the development of artificial intelligence systems for dialogue between the dead and the living.”7 It has also become possible to continue your activity after death. The most famous example is the rock singer Ronnie James “Dio” (“Dio” refers not to a religious figure or God, but to the pseudonym of the Italian-American gangster Johnny Dio [= Giovanni Ignazio Dioguardi]), who died in 2010. Thanks to a hologram Ronnie was able to undertake a world tour in 2017 (Dio Returns), with great success in terms of audience and receipts.8

6.see: https://www.facebook.com/settings, Memorialization Settings. 7.G. Ziccardi, Il libro digitale dei morti. Memoria, lutto eternità e oblio nell’era dei social network, Milan, Utet, 2017, 19. 8.See “Ronnie James Dio, il re dell’heavy metal torna sui palchi... come ologramma” (www.tgcom24.mediaset.it/spettacolo/ronnie-james-dio-il-re- dell-heavy-metal-torna-sui-palchi-come-ologramma_3086321-201702a. shtml), July 27, 2017. GIOVANNI CUCCI, SJ

This makes it much harder to die in the internet age. Among the many possibilities available there is also the offer of “digital gravediggers,” willing to take care of the virtual interface of the deceased and implement a sort of electronic cremation of data. These possibilities have significant consequences, which should be taken into account in psychological, emotional and above all educational terms (bearing in mind that almost all young people surf the web). Always having a deceased person in the interface with whom one dialogues (or substituting oneself for it) leads once again to the erasure of the idea of death: “Pretending that there is a person who is no longer there means, in fact, making concrete the paradox according to which the death did not occur, although it did happen, complicating the human relationship with the end of life. The 103 artificial continuity between the physical person, deceased and progressively decomposing, and a digital surrogate, which reproduces online narratives endlessly on media that are immune to becoming and aging, can trivialize the detachment, interruption and loss, the sum of which – on the one hand – shapes the definitive profile of the dead and – on the other – allows the grieving person to reconstruct his or her own existence again, planning for a new future.”9 The relationships between the living and the dead become less and less tangible and indefinable. The dead, until now placed in special sacred spaces (i.e. separated from the world), continue to live on the web and become more and more part of the world of the living, until they become indistinguishable from them (as in the case of the Luka app). The very idea of the cemetery acquires new features and new meanings, on which we have not yet sufficiently reflected: “Social networks [...] have become, despite themselves, gigantic digital cemeteries, where the dialogical exchanges between individual users take place amid expanses of ghost profiles, full of thoughts, photographs and memories related to people who are no longer there. On Facebook there are around fifty million deceased users and recent studies predict

9.D. Sisto, “Digital Death. Le trasformazioni digitali della morte e del lutto”, op. cit., 56. DEATH IN THE DIGITAL AGE that, at the end of the century, if the popular social network is still active, there will be more profiles of the deceased than of users still alive. Facebook is, in other words, already today the largest cemetery in the world, accessible from any place with a data connection. It is a uniform cemetery, indifferent to the individual beliefs of its users,”10 which eloquently reflects the fluid character of the web. In this way also the dimension of time is profoundly restructured, and with it the idea of something definitive, of no return, of which death is precisely the most powerful symbol available to the human imagination. The changed relationship that one has with the dead also affects relationships with the living, which risk being reduced to episodic moments, available at the click of a button. In 104 the absence of time limits, everything remains open, but also chaotic, unfinished, frayed. And it makes it more problematic to become engaged permanently for something worthwhile. The fragility of emotional relationships is a sign of this changed relationship with time. The psychologist Catherine Ternynck reports the eloquent words of a man in therapy: “‘In love, as in books, I like only the first chapter. There everything is said ... in what follows there is no taste’ [...]. From this perhaps the clinical intuition in the face of numerous psychic sufferings, according to which true loneliness is.”11

‘Privacy’ and grief All this creates significant difficulties in terms of mourning, or processing grief. This obviously becomes problematic if the loved one is always present and, as we noted, willing to talk to those who remain by means of appropriate software that perfectly reproduces the tone and cadence of the voice, thanks to algorithms that allow access to an increasingly vast amount of memories (and in the future further expandable with the cloning of the brain) and make their speech credible.

10.Ibid., 57. 11.C. Ternynck, L’ uomo di sabbia..., op. cit., 110f. GIOVANNI CUCCI, SJ

These are innovations that, together with the rapid spread of cremation – a move for which there has been a lack of appropriate exploration of its consequences on a cultural and psychological level in the West – make it more difficult to let go of the dead person (the work of mourning), which is indispensable to continue healthy living. Equally irrelevant becomes the dimension of corporeality, a fundamental anthropological theme that is indispensable to acquiring awareness of the event/death: “Never having watched over a corpse is a metaphor for how the narcissist society has relegated illness and death to educational and cultural removal, making discourse on death and suicidal fantasies obscene and inaccessible.”12 Without the thought of death, of a definitive point of no return reflecting the limited time available, even life is extinguished. 105 When grief is not processed, Freud noted, it becomes melancholy, an evil aspect of life, a phenomenon that is worryingly increasing in our societies and that has serious repercussions even in political planning, to the point of making life impossible.13 Another disturbing consequence of the inability to deal with grief comes from an increasing number of cases of domestic violence, of murder (especially of women), which arise from the refusal to accept loss, such as the possible end of a relationship. According to data provided by Eures (European Commission), 142 women were killed in Italy in 2018 (+0.7 percent compared to 2017), of whom 119 were killed in the family context (+6.3 percent). The percentage of female victims is higher than ever (40.3 percent). The main reasons are jealousy and possessiveness (32.8 percent).14 Denying the idea of death leads to its indiscriminate spread within ordinary life. By offering access to a virtual community, social networks can certainly help and comfort those who remain, forming chains of solidarity to overcome the sense of loneliness that is one of the most

12.G. Pietropolli Charmet - A. Piotti (eds), Uccidersi. Il tentativo di suicidio in adolescenza, Milan, Raffaello Cortina, 2009, 43. 13.See G. Cucci, “Le nuove melancholie”. I destini del desiderio secondo Massimo Recalcati”, in Civ. Catt. 2020 I 381-389. 14.See www.eures.it/sintesi-femminicidio-e-violenza-di-genere-in-italia/ In 2019, 94 women were killed for the same reasons. DEATH IN THE DIGITAL AGE painful aspects of losing a loved one. But they must do so with caution, taking into account the long time and the gradual nature of the difficult task of mourning. Otherwise, you risk celebrating yourself: you post a touching message just to be present on the platform and to highlight your own attentiveness, or to receive a remarkable response of “likes”, without thinking about how others are living that painful moment. Knowing that your messages will be seen and spread increases considerably the risk of reducing death to entertainment, even if it is to denounce a violence suffered, as in the case of Oceane, a 19-year-old French girl who filmed her suicide live on the web, or those who, instead of helping those in danger, take photos that ensure a high number of views.15

An example 106 Claire Wilmot, in an article in The Atlantic, analyzes the impact that social media had for her and her family with the death of her sister, Lauren. Claire was first of all struck by the fact that most of her relatives and close friends knew about it from Facebook, before they could even become aware of what happened and decide the most appropriate way to communicate that terrible news. What especially nauseated her was the way Lauren’s story was publicized, adding pain to pain by not respecting what she and her family were experiencing: “When I asked for some of the most offensive posts to be removed, I received no understanding, but hostility. ‘My intention was to celebrate Lauren,’ wrote one, defensively, as if good intentions were all that mattered. As cynical as it may sound, I wondered if the posts about other people’s deaths are used in a way not very different from the other posts on social media, as a means to assert one’s identity in a hectic online environment.”16

15.“I’m not doing this to create a mess, but to get people to react, to open their minds,” said the woman in one of those live fragments [...]. Last month in Ohio, USA, an 18-year-old woman not only refused to rescue a 17-year-old friend who had been raped, but also broadcast the fact live on Periscope. “Never seen a case like this,” explained Ron O’Brien, Franklin County DA. Maybe because this kind of technology wasn’t in our pockets until a few months ago,” www.wired. it/attualita/tech/2016/05/12/suicidio-periscope-dittatura-streaming. 16.C. Wilmot, “The Space Between Mourning and Grief”, in The Atlantic, June 8, 2016. GIOVANNI CUCCI, SJ

The journalist certainly does not want to condemn social media. They really are a point of no return for everyone. But the world of the web is also a mirror of the ambivalence that characterizes every new discovery; it offers endless possibilities, but the speed that characterizes it raises the doubt as to whether it allows access to the deepest and truest dimensions of the human being; the risk of reducing every event, even the most intimate and painful, to a sort of spectacle and self- exhibition is real and must be discussed. There is something that cannot be transmitted on social media and requires rather silence and discretion; otherwise, instead of helping those who suffer, it accentuates their pain and sense of incommunicable loneliness. “Social media often reproduce the worst cultural failures surrounding death, that is banalities that help those on 107 the periphery of a tragedy to rationalize what happened, but obscure the uncomfortable, disorderly reality of loss. Social media have increased the speed and ease of communication to an unprecedented level, yet sites like Facebook and Twitter are poorly suited to represent the peculiarity of grief [...]. Social media may have opened up the space for public grief, but a ritual to ensure that the outburst supports grieving people (or at least does not make their situation more painful) has yet to be processed.”17 The presence of a virtual community that speaks of the deceased and communicates with those who remain does not replace the process of mourning that knows its own paths, linked to the acceptance of grief and anger, especially helplessness in the face of the disappearance of a loved one, the emptiness left and the silence necessary for the inner exploration and the reinterpretation of history shared together.18 That is why Wilmot proposes to use other ways that can help and that the web cannot suppress or replace. First of all, there is the importance of waiting, of taking time before doing anything, overcoming the temptation to be the first to share the scoop. Secondly, there is the need to get in touch with family

17.Ibid. 18.See G. Cucci, “L’elaborazione del lutto come ritorno alla vita”, in Civ. Catt. 2017 IV 229-243. DEATH IN THE DIGITAL AGE members through more ordinary, also more discreet and intimate channels, such as visiting them at home or telephoning them, or through messages in a strictly private form. If these modes are too difficult, social media risks becoming a kind of “Linus’ blanket” to mask our impotence. However, it is important to recognize it, because it can foster a true relationship with oneself and with the other, in an empathetic way, helping us first of all to understand the experience of those who have lost a loved one. A theme that has been explored many times involving the novelties and limits of the digital sphere returns: the online world can reflect, but it cannot replace the offline world. Under these conditions it can best express its enormous potentiality, in terms of personal and collective growth.19 108

19.For a more in-depth examination of the subject, see Id., Paradiso virtuale o infer.net? Rischi e opportunità della rivoluzione digitale, Milan, Àncora - La Civiltà Cattolica, 2015. ‘A New Imagination of the Possible’ Seven Images from Francis for Post Covid-19

Antonio Spadaro, SJ

The first global pandemic of the digital age arrived suddenly. The world was stopped in its tracks by an unnatural suspension of activity that interrupted business and pleasure. “For weeks now it has been evening. Thick darkness has gathered over our 109 squares, our streets and our cities; it has taken over our lives, filling everything with a deafening silence and a distressing void that stops everything as it passes by. We feel it in the air, we notice in people’s gestures, their glances give them away. We find ourselves afraid and lost.” These are the words Pope Francis used to portray the unprecedented situation. He pronounced them on March 27 before a completely empty Saint Peter’s Square, during an evening of Eucharistic adoration and an Urbi et Orbi blessing that was accompanied only by the sound of church bells mixed with ambulance sirens: the sacred and the pain. The pope has also stated that this crisis period caused by the Covid-19 pandemic is “ a propitious time to find the courage for a new imagination of the possible, with the realism that only the Gospel can offer us.”1 The thick darkness, then, allows us to find the courage to imagine. How was it possible to send out such a message in a moment of depression and fear? We are accustomed to the probable, to what our minds suppose should happen, statistically speaking. However, we often lack the vision of the possible, which is sometimes confined to the world of the imagination.

La Civiltà Cattolica, En. Ed. Vol. 4, no. 07 art. 11, 0620: 10.32009/22072446.0720.11

1.Francis, “Un plan para resuscitar. Una meditación”, in Vida Nueva, April 18-24, 2020, 8-11. ‘A NEW IMAGINATION OF THE POSSIBLE’

We are not accustomed to dwelling in possibility, to use the words of Emily Dickinson. So we need a “realism” that breaks our “fixed or failing patterns, modes and structures” and inspires us to imagine a different world, “making all things new,” as the Book of Revelation says. “Are we willing to change our lifestyles?” the pope asks.

Francis and contagion in a slowed down world It is clear that there is a compelling need to understand what is happening to us, to give a human and spiritual reading of what we are living. For Francis, “understanding what God is saying to us at this time of pandemic also represents a challenge for the Church’s mission.”2 It is also clear that we must first of all understand what we have done wrong. The pope, as a truly 110 global leader, the only one at the moment recognized as such even in unsuspected quarters, has spoken of a seriously ill planet, of planetary injustices caused by an economy that aims only at profit, of international conflicts that today must be brought to an immediate end, and of embargoes and national selfishness. The pandemic has unmasked our vulnerability and the false and unnecessary security with which we have built our agendas, our projects, our habits and our priorities. Change will occur if there is a chemical reaction between the “overflowing proclamation” of the Gospel and life “as it comes.”3 This is what generates the “renewing outlook” that we need today. We are not called “to restart” in order to return to the normality of a golden age that in reality never was golden, but instead “to start anew.” The narratives of the restart are harmful, because they naturally tend to restore balances that must change. We need a new beginning. The coronavirus is, in its own way, an alien. Or rather, by invading our bodies, it suddenly has changed the way we look

2.Id., “Message for World Mission Day 2020”. Francis, in a Letter to the priests of the diocese of Rome dated May 30, 2020, makes an analogy and recalls how the first apostolic community “also lived moments of confinement, isolation, fear and uncertainty.” Fifty days passed between the closure “and the incipient announcement that would change their lives forever.” 3.Ibid. ANTONIO SPADARO, SJ

at things; it forced us to see with an unaccustomed perspective, and we saw the world turned upside down. From that empty St. Peter’s Square on March 27, Francis spoke of a “necessary immunity.” But this is because the virus has become a metaphor that reveals a “sick world.” Immunity to the virus becomes the image of the necessary immunity to the evil of the world. Even the pandemic can be metaphorically overturned in its own destructive meaning and understood as a “contagion of hope.” With Covid-19 we saw ourselves projected into a mirror that suddenly opened up before us. We saw our image inverted but, at the same time, connected to all the space around it: the deserted megalopolises, the absence of traffic the cities as appendages of empty fields. The effect has been like that of a spinning pinwheel or a cursor, 111 which appears on our monitors when there are slowdowns in programs or computer connections. We do not tolerate slowness or waiting, and so we normally abandon the blocked program or the slow connection. Now the “spinning wheel” caused by the virus is prolonged, and the state of suspension has affected society, the sense of relationships, worship and trade, the value of presence. This is why the infection has given us a sense of the apocalypse. Due to this shock, the inability to imagine a benign future has emerged. During this time of pandemic Francis has intervened many times. Above all, he has comforted millions of people – from Rome to Beijing, from Beirut to Lima – with the Masses celebrated in Santa Marta. There has been the whispering of the Gospel in the silence of our homes, blessing with the Eucharist, mourning of death and suffering, the celebrating of life as much as possible. Consolation, comfort and prayer of intercession entered the homes of so many people. This is the first message of an accompanying Church. But Francis also aimed very much at building a new imagination to interpret both the present moment and the future, the vision of the possible. We now look at the seven figures he has used to articulate his argument. They are the boat, the flame, the underground, the war (of the poets), the anointing, the window, and the pandemic itself understood as a metaphor. ‘A NEW IMAGINATION OF THE POSSIBLE’

The boat in the storm The first image is the boat. In St. Peter’s Square that March 27, at 6 p.m., before adoring the Blessed Sacrament and giving his blessing Urbi et Orbi, the pope said: “We have realized that we are on the same boat, all of us fragile and disoriented, but at the same time important and needed, all of us called to row together, each of us in need of comforting the other. We are all of us on this boat.” The powerful image was articulated in his language and 4 contextualized. The boat is in the storm, which “unmasks our vulnerability and leaves uncovered those false and unnecessary certainties with which we have built our agendas, our projects, our habits and priorities.” This is what the pandemic is: a storm that reveals the condition of the 112 present in which we all live, a mirror that mercilessly reflects the image of a present in which “we have not awakened to wars and planetary injustice, we have not listened to the cry of the poor, and of our seriously ill planet. We continued undaunted, thinking that we would always remain healthy in a sick world. Now, while we are at sea in turmoil, we implore you, ‘Wake up Lord!’” Similarly, in one of his homilies, 5 Francis also used the image of the flood. Looking into this mirror, the invocation, the prayer, is formed. Reality makes prayer spring from the heart, not pious speech. It also prompts action, for “it is time to reset the course of life toward You, Lord, and toward others.” Sailing in this boat, we can “look at so many exemplary companions who, in fear, reacted by giving their lives.” And who are these comrades? Francis does not intend to make abstract speeches. He lists them, because a list is always the mark of reality in its richness and diversity: “doctors, nurses, supermarket employees, cleaners, caregivers, providers of

4.The boat is also the image that Francis used on September 27, 2014, in the homily of the Mass for the celebration of the 200th anniversary of the reconstitution of the Society of Jesus. On that occasion he said to the Jesuits: “Row therefore! Row, be strong, even in a contrary wind!” (Francis, “Remate dunque! Remate, siate forti!”, in Civ. Catt. 2014 IV 108). 5.Cf. Francis, Homily at Mass in Santa Marta, May 14, 2020. ANTONIO SPADARO, SJ

transport, law and order forces, volunteers, priests, religious men and women and so very many others who have understood that no one reaches salvation by themselves.” The boat becomes the figure of a radical and human fraternity that the virus has made clear by attacking anyone and everyone, without any distinction of race, religion, origin or nationality. This is what the boat indicates: fraternity.6 Those words used by the pope in addressing the Jesuits in his homily on September 27, 2014, now apply to the whole of humanity. And the storm is the ideal place to discover fraternity, because it is not the situation to display or boast about strength and security. The storm implies embracing – with long oar strokes – “all the adversities of the present time, abandoning for a moment our yearning for omnipotence and possession,” 113 and finding the courage to open “spaces where everyone can feel called and allow new forms of hospitality, fraternity and solidarity.” The believer recognizes that this fraternity is not human work and that one must “give space to the creativity that only the Spirit is capable of arousing.”

The new flame in the night It was in the Easter Urbi et Orbi blessing that Francis provided another image, that of the flame, the second figure providing a stimulus to envisage what might be possible. If the pandemic was previously “storm,” now it is “night,” “the night of a world already struggling with epochal challenges and now oppressed by the pandemic, which puts our great human family to the test.” And precisely during this night “the voice of the Church has resounded: ‘Christ, my hope, is risen!’” Francis often uses the image of the night. In particular, at the beginning of his pontificate, in Brazil, when referring to

6.Let us remember that in Evangelii Gaudium Francis had used the image of the “caravan” as an expression of the “mystique of living together, of mingling and encounter, of embracing and supporting one another, of stepping into this flood tide which, while chaotic, can become a genuine experience of fraternity” (No. 87). The pope loves these images of collective transport, accustomed as he was to buses and subways. He reveals in a daily and simple image the sense of the common story of the world and of universal ties. ‘A NEW IMAGINATION OF THE POSSIBLE’ the disciples walking to Emmaus he said: “We need a Church unafraid of going forth into the night.” And on April 26 – in the midst of the pandemic – during the Regina Coeli he said: “We will discover that there are no unexpected events, no uphill paths, no nights that cannot be faced with Jesus.” Francis describes the night of this pandemic time by focusing on four precise aspects, in some way four “nights.” These nights compose a picture of the situation, starting from the concerns of the ordinary citizens to open up a wider look at Europe, and the more complex international scenario, caught up between sanctions and conflicts. This list of “nights” should be carefully reviewed. The first night touches the life of thecitizens , who live in “a time of concern for the uncertain future, for the work they risk 114 losing and for the other consequences that the current crisis brings with it.” The pope encourages “those with political responsibilities to work actively for the common good of citizens, providing the necessary means and instruments to enable everyone to lead a dignified life and to encourage, when circumstances permit, the resumption of the usual daily activities.” The second night is international sanctions. Francis launched an appeal for the easing of the sanctions “which inhibit the possibility of the countries that are the recipients of them to provide adequate support to their citizens, and enable all states to meet the greater needs of the moment, reducing, if not even forgiving, the debt that weighs on the budgets of the poorest ones.” The third night is selfishness and rivalry between states. Here the pope’s speech was centered on Europe, to which he dedicated various references, including during the Masses celebrated in Santa Marta. At Easter he said: “Among the many areas of the world affected by the coronavirus, I address a special thought to Europe. After the Second World War, this continent was able to rise again thanks to a concrete spirit of solidarity that allowed it to overcome the rivalries of the past. It is all the more urgent, especially in today’s circumstances, that these rivalries should not be revived, but that everyone ANTONIO SPADARO, SJ

should recognize themselves as part of one family and support each other. Today the European Union faces an epoch- making challenge on which not only its future but that of the whole world will depend. Do not miss the opportunity to give further proof of solidarity, even by resorting to innovative solutions. The alternative is only the selfishness of particular interests and the temptation to return to the past, with the risk of putting peaceful coexistence and the development of future generations to the test.” The fourth night is the night of armed conflict, with the call for a “global and immediate ceasefire in all corners of the world. This is not the time to continue manufacturing and trafficking weapons, spending huge amounts of capital that should be used to heal people and save lives.” Here the direct references were 115 to Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Israel and Palestine, Ukraine, several African countries and Mozambique in particular, Libya, Greece and Turkey, Venezuela. The four nights of the pandemic are a wide-ranging look at the world at the time of Covid-19 that identifies the knots to be undone. On to this scenario of “nights” of the world falls the prayer: “Christ our peace, enlighten those who have responsibilities.” This is an appeal that reveals the vanity of the reasoning of those who do not want to understand how the pope’s words about the world are not inspired by politics or ideology, but by the Gospel of Christ. It is clear that Francis also intends to develop the principle of moral leadership proper to Vatican diplomacy, in a world that sees its geopolitical balances upset and that needs a robust confirmation of democratic dynamics.

The underground and the mountains In the interview given to Austin Ivereigh, available through the Civiltà Cattolica website, Francis said: “I’m going to dare to offer some advice. This is the time to go to the underground. I’m thinking of Dostoyevsky’s short novel, Notes from the ‘A NEW IMAGINATION OF THE POSSIBLE’

7 Underground.” Go underground to see the earth and understand its dynamics: this is necessary. These are dynamics that the pope reveals by referring to photographs: “A photo appeared the other day of a parking lot in Las Vegas where the homeless had been put in quarantine. And the hotels were empty. But the homeless cannot go to a hotel. That is the throwaway culture.” And another one: “In Rome recently, in the midst of the quarantine, a policeman said to a man: ‘You can’t be on the street, go home.’ The response was: ‘I have no home. I live on the street.’” The call is to open our eyes, to see: “To ‘see’ the poor means to restore their humanity. They are not things, not garbage; they are people. We can’t settle for a welfare policy such as we have for rescued animals.” So “going underground” means passing “from the hyper-virtual, fleshless world to the suffering 116 flesh of the poor.” Seeing the waste leads to touching the flesh. Addressing the issue of young people, in that interview Francis proposed a reversal of the top/down perspective, and indicated the direction of the gaze from below. He asks the young people, in fact, to have “the courage to look ahead.” And he says this by quoting Virgil. When Aeneas has lost everything following defeat in Troy, two paths lie before him: remain there to weep and end his life, or “follow what was in his heart, to go up to the mountain and leave the war behind. It’s a beautiful verse: Cessi, et sublato montem genitore petivi ‘I gave way to fate and, bearing my father on my shoulders, made for the mountain.’”

The war of poets In a context in which the “fight” against the virus has been treated in war-like terms, which describe it as an invasion by an enemy power, the citizen becomes a soldier and the helper becomes a hero. The logos gives way to polemos. In this semantic field generated by the word “war,” the one who “falls” and becomes ill is a loser. The sick person is a loser.

7.A. Ivereigh, “The Confined Pope. Interview with Pope Francis”, in La Civilta Cattolica En., April 9, 2020, https://www.laciviltacattolica.com/pope- francis-and-the-coronavirus-crisis/ ANTONIO SPADARO, SJ

The pope does not shirk the use of the war metaphor, but he makes it perform a pirouette that alters its usual meaning. “In these days, full of difficulties and deep anguish,” he wrote in a letter to the Popular Movements on Easter Sunday, “many have used war-like metaphors to refer to the pandemic we are experiencing. If the struggle against Covid-19 is a war, then you are truly an invisible army, fighting in the most dangerous trenches, an army whose only weapons are solidarity, hope, and community spirit, all revitalizing at a time when no one can save themselves alone. As I told you in our meetings, to me you are ‘social poets’ because, from the forgotten peripheries where you live, you create admirable solutions for the most pressing problems afflicting the marginalized.” It is very interesting how the metaphor is taken up and 117 emptied from the inside, and resolved in its opposite. Who is the invisible army that fights in dangerous trenches? It is the poets, the “social poets.” The pope’s expression is unusual and must be explored. Who is the poet? It is the person who makes creative use of language: he or she uses everyone’s words, but to express something in a divergent way, an alternative to ordinary speech, to common or dominant narratives. It is necessary to create a narrative that knows how to take risks and that corresponds to the appeal: “Roll up your sleeves and keep working for your families, your communities, and the common good.” Francis repeated this concept in other words during the Regina Coeli on May 24: “Encourage us to tell and share constructive stories that help us to understand that we are all part of a story that is larger than ourselves, and we can look to the future with hope if we truly care for one another as brothers and sisters.” The pope uses the poetic-social paradigm to oppose the technocratic ones that put the state or the market at the center: “Now more than ever, persons, communities and peoples must be put at the center, united to heal, to care and to share,” writes Francis. The action of the army of poets aims at “healing,” that is, it has a therapeutic value. Healing consists in “taking back control of our lives,” in shaking “our sleepy consciences,” in producing “a human and ecological conversion that puts an end to the idolatry of money and places human life and dignity at the center.” ‘A NEW IMAGINATION OF THE POSSIBLE’

The perfumed anointing of service A fourth image used by Francis is the one that emerges from an article he wrote in the magazine Vida Nueva on April 17, 2020, entitled “A Plan to Resurrect.”8 In this very rich text the pope affirms that the pandemic situation that “overwhelmed” us evokes in the believer a listening to the “overflowing” proclamation of the resurrection.9 What was the pontiff focusing on? “We have seen,” he writes, “the anointing poured by doctors, nurses, supermarket employees, cleaners, caregivers, providers of transport, law and order forces, volunteers, priests, religious men and women and so very many others who had the courage to offer everything they had to give a little care, calm and soul to the situation.” Here the list appears again. But those who were described on 118 March 27 as “exemplary companions for the journey,” now, on April 17, are those who pour the oil of anointing, perfumed like chrism, that is, the oil of consolation and blessing. After all, companionship is a blessing. And “the poured perfume” has “more capacity for diffusion” than the despair that threatened the disciples at the death of the Master. Thus “it is enough to open a crack so that the anointing the Lord wants to give us can expand with unstoppable force and allow us to contemplate the painful reality with a renewing gaze.” It is the perfumed anointing of service that accompanies sorrowful humanity and allows us to be “creators and protagonists of a common history.” This is once again the key point: the anointing leads to the construction of a common history that reveals human brotherhood. Francis’ message is strongly affirmative in this sense. The time of the virus becomes a kairos, a favorable moment of which to take advantage. From the analysis of the “nights” of the world we pass to the vision of the future that awaits us, “if we act as one people.” The anointing “opens horizons” and “awakens creativity,” which for its rhythm has the “beat of the Spirit.” The political

8.See Francis, “Un plan para resuscitar...”, op. cit. 9.See D. Fares, “The Heart of ‘Querida Amazonia’: ‘Overflowing en route’”, Civ. Catt. En. May 2020 https://www.laciviltacattolica.com/the-heart-of-queri- da-amazonia-overflowing-en-route/ ANTONIO SPADARO, SJ

discourse becomes spiritual and prophetic; the Lord “wants to generate in this concrete moment of history” dynamics of “new life.” And so – as we already mentioned at the beginning of this reflection – “this is the propitious time to find the courage for a new imagination of the possible, with the realism that only the Gospel can offer. The Spirit, who does not allow himself to be locked up or used within fixed or transient schemes, modalities and structures, proposes to unite us to his movement capable of ‘making all things new’ (Rev 21:5).” Hence the appeal: “Let us take this trial as an opportunity to prepare for the tomorrow of all, without discarding anyone: of all. This is because without a vision for everyone there will be no future for anyone.”

119 The window and the society of preventive medicine A negative image that we highlight was used by Francis in his Letter to the priests of the diocese of Rome, sent on May 30 because it had not been possible to celebrate the Chrism Mass. In a dense text, he treasures the intense communication he had with the priests of his diocese by e-mail and telephone. From these “sincere dialogues” he was confirmed in the fact that the “necessary distance was not synonymous with withdrawal or closure into the self that anesthetizes, puts mission to sleep and turns it off.” Indeed, “the notion of a ‘safe’ society, carefree and poised for infinite consumption” has been challenged by the virus, “revealing its lack of cultural and spiritual immunity to conflict.” One should not delude oneself that the questions that have emerged in this time will be answered with the reopening of activities. Rather, it will be indispensable to “prepare and open up the path that the Lord is now calling us to take.” It is not possible, therefore, to remain extraneous to these realities by simply “looking out at them from the window.” Here is the negative image, the window as synonymous with distance. The pope instead praises the priests “soaked by the raging storm.” “Soaked” is the key word. It is not the balconyar, as the pope likes to say in his Argentine porteño dialect, but the Church being on the road, callejera. Francis actually gave this message by placing his body, even his limp, at the service of a message ‘A NEW IMAGINATION OF THE POSSIBLE’ of closeness and hope. On the afternoon of Sunday, March 15, walking along a stretch of Via del Corso, as if on pilgrimage, he reached the church of San Marcello al Corso, where there is the miraculous Crucifix that in 1522 was carried in procession through the districts of the city to end the “Great Plague” in Rome. In his prayer Francis sought the end of the pandemic. His spiritual authority was concentrated in his perfect isolation at a time when bodies had disappeared from the streets. Those steps were necessary to offer up to Christ on the cross our lockdown and prophetically foreshadow the paved road after Covid. “Looking out at them from the window” instead confirms the narrative of preventative medicine, being safe, which is brought about by distancing and anesthetizing. The logic of the window must be overcome by an immersive logic, which 120 “soaks” and involves from below, inviting us to elaborate new ways and new lifestyles.

The pandemic as a metaphor for understanding the world Finally, we note how the pontiff in his speeches used not only metaphors to talk about the pandemic and its effects, but the pandemic itself as a metaphor for diseases in general and for the evils of the world10: “But there are so many other pandemics that make people die and we don’t notice – said Francis in Santa Marta on May 14, 2020 – we look the other way.” And, after recalling some data, he continued: “May God have mercy on us and stop the other awful pandemics: of hunger, of war, of

10.It is a peculiar use, because in his speeches Francis uses the vocabulary of health in a very flexible way. For example, he once said that “the Word that saves does not go in search of preserved, sterilized, safe places” (Francis, Homily for the Sunday of the Word of God, January 26, 2020). Speaking with the Jesuits in Mozambique on September 5, 2019, he had supported crossbreeding, saying that “today we are tempted by a form of sterilized sociology. It seems that one considers a country as if it were an operating theatre, where everything is sterilized: my race, my family, my culture, as if there were a fear of dirtying it, staining it, infecting it” (A. Spadaro, “The Sovereignty of the People of God”. The dialogues of Pope Francis with the Jesuits of Mozambique and Madagascar”, in Civ. Catt En., Sept, 2019 (https://www.laciviltacattolica.com/the-sovereignty- of-the-people-of-god-the-pontiff-meets-the-jesuits-of-mozambique-and- madagascar/). It is therefore clear that for Francis the semantic field of the word “sterile” is negative. ANTONIO SPADARO, SJ

children without education.” In the homily for the Second Sunday of Easter, the “pandemic” detected by the pope was that of the virus called “indifferent selfishness.” There is a sort of pandemic of the spirit and of social relations, of which the coronavirus has become a symbol and image.

Boat, flame, underground, war (of the poets), anointing, window, pandemic Here then are the seven images: the boat, the flame, the underground, the war (of the poets), the perfumed anointing, the useless window, the pandemic itself as a metaphor. These are the tesserae that make up the mosaic of an imagined, possible world that calls our attention, on the one hand, and on the 121 other, encourages us: “Faith grants us a realistic and creative imagination, one capable of abandoning the mentality of repetition, substitution and maintenance” and pushes us to “face reality without fear.”11 Francis has indicated with his seven images – not in a Pelagian and voluntaristic way, but relying on the work of the Spirit – a firm trust in the human person, and in reason that can understand problems – and in the ability to act with competence and determination. The pope has enhanced the time of waiting, the “spinning wheel” of our operating system, to become a “mirror” for a world in crisis. And to do this he had to interpret chaos. In the end, however, the mirror is the Gospel itself. Whoever does not see it and relegates Francis’ discourse to “politics” without faith falls into a visual aberration, into that strabismus caused by the lack of fusion that allows the images of the two eyes to unite into one vision. Francis looks at the world as the vicar of Christ, that is, with the eyes of Christ; and he does so theologically, combining an apocalyptic interpretation, an invitation to conversion and an Easter perspective of death and resurrection.12

11.Francis, Letter to the priests of the diocese of Rome, op. cit. 12.Cf. L. Oviedo Torró, “La teologia en tiempos de pandemia”, in Razón y fe, 2020, 281. ‘A NEW IMAGINATION OF THE POSSIBLE’

The task for the Church is what the pope had already indicated in the interview with La Civiltà Cattolica in 2013: to be a “field hospital”13 to heal and tend the wounds of humanity. Believers are not called to multiply pious words, but to give Gospel solutions, moved and inspired by Revelation. This is the social doctrine of the Church. This is the conversion of the gaze. And this is the time of a different world, which requires both the recognition of global vulnerability and the imagination proper to Gospel realism.

122

13.A. Spadaro, “Intervista a Papa Francesco”, in Civ. Catt. 2013 III 449-477.