The words of Pope Francis on cancel culture are significant, innovative and disruptive. Italics by Andrea Mainardi
Of the 3965 words spoken by Pope Francis to the feluccas representing 183 States in the Vatican, in addition to the European Union and the Order of Malta, the most significant, innovative and disruptive are of a clear judgment on cancel culture. Words never heard before and that if they were not so quickly received – as in Europe – they would open intriguing alternative chapters on the alleged narration of a much more complex pontificate than the alleged flattening of the two opposing factions in which it is expected to be restricted.
In what is the second, equal merit most awaited speech of the year, or the best wishes to the Diplomatic Corps for the new year, to be read in a non-rigorous but not distracted synopsis with that to the Roman Curia before Christmas, Francis dictated:
In name of the protection of diversity, one ends up by canceling the sense of every identity, with the risk of silencing the positions that defend a respectful and balanced idea of ​​the various sensitivities. A single – dangerous – thought is being elaborated, forced to deny history, or worse still to rewrite it on the basis of contemporary categories, while every historical situation must be interpreted according to the hermeneutics of the time, not the hermeneutics of today.
Bergoglio said:
As I have been able to affirm on other occasions, I believe that it is a form of ideological colonization, which leaves no room for freedom of expression and which today increasingly takes the form of that cancel culture, which invades many areas and public institutions.
It could be absent-mindedly referenced only to the not infrequent judgments on gender and its surroundings. But Francesco must be read carefully, especially when he turns to politics; either of the Curia or the Civil.
That paragraph, sewn into a non-benevolent judgment on the crunch of multilateral diplomacy, covers and informs those repeatedly expressed on immigration and pandemic and vaccines and abuse – issues promptly touched upon and thoroughly on Monday, alongside a look at the situations in progress on the globe.
He presses the reasoning:
The lack of effectiveness of many international organizations is also due to the different vision, among the various members, of the aims they should aim for. Not infrequently the center of gravity has shifted to issues which are by their nature divisive and not strictly related to the purpose of the organization, with the result of agendas increasingly dictated by a thought that denies the natural foundations of humanity and its roots. cultural which constitute the identity of many peoples.
That is:
In the name of the protection of diversity, we end up erasing the sense of any identity.
This is the key.
An antibergogliano in effective permanent service would have much more than one reason to reproach Francis for his shortly before mentioned dialectical marriages in favor of anti-Covid vaccines. How to say wrong: despite Galileo and much more, the Church still blesses that or the other scientific hypothesis; often betting on the winning paradigm, no less erring. A review of a Thomas Khun and his structures of scientific revolutions would be enough to set out towards a prudential non possumus and remain in the open enclosures of the evangelical and magisterial announcement of birth, death and resurrection. But the Aquinas of the Summa, well known to Bergoglio, is too Thomistic to certain delicate traditionalist palates that the actus fidei credentis non terminatur ad enuntiabile sed ad rem. In short: believing does not end with knowing the doctrine but with changing your life. Otherwise it is useless (the Bolognese Dominican fathers will forgive our free translation).
In the italic narration, after all, everything has inoculated on that point: reducing the speech to the world of yesterday, to the quarrels between Chigi and Quirinale, between inuent press conferences by the premier. Squeezing an allocation of what is primate of Italy, but which from Rome up and down is forgotten even – despite the refusal to use the initials pp in the signature – the pastor pastoris, who spoke to the whole world.
Of identity and difference.
To resume:
In the name of the protection of diversity, we end up by erasing the sense of every identity, with the risk of silencing the positions that defend a respectful and balanced idea of ​​the various sensitivities.
In fact, the point has been much grasped by the progressive and traditionalist Anglo-Saxons more than by the Europeans who are concentrated on the already strange pontifical judgments on immigration and vaccines.
Asymptomatic analytics; but all infected by the continentals. Especially in the US where the accounts are still being dealt with a year after the assault on Capitol Hill; where an Episcopal Conference is described irritated by the Argentine Jorge Mario. True but also not.
In fact, from there, with acuity, the contextual – on the announced day – rapid retirement of the CL bishop of Reggio Emilia, Massimo Camisasca – resigned for the canons 75 years only a few weeks ago and immediately jubilant – is revealed. In his place, the number two of the Congregation of the Faith, Giacomo Morandi, raised by surplus to the title of archbishop ad personam. Where the news according to the gazzettieri pupils of Popper would lie in the removal of Morandi from the Holy Office for excessive rigidity against gender culture and gay marriage. As if to say, they allude: you see, the Pope takes it out on ideological colonization – or even gender, but in practice he distances those who contest it from Rome.
Francesco, who has precipitated his character in his curriculum, and of whom he publicly apologized several times, on January 10, however, opened different horizons to progressives and traditionalists. Not mentioning it, he invited Emmanuel Levinas to take back. To deal with the nauseating – he defines it as dangerous – uniformity of the single thought.
Ideology that subdued and emerged to the sound of selfies with the take-offs of the statues of Columbus; and passed with those of the European slaveholders, ending up in the tattered lounges of Big Brother or the coolest talks where it takes 10 days to say that the herd of Piazza Duomo in Milan was made up of young Arabs. As if identifying someone by race and religion were discriminatory, as required by journalistic ethics – among other things and not since yesterday – and it was not a simple news item. As if to give the other Romagnolo that in that case and murderess dirty the cappelletti. (Yes, there have also been murderers from Romagna and, God forbid, there will be more. As well as Milanese, and Arabs, and Christians and Muslims). But better keep quiet, fear of offending. By deleting.
Like the boisterous Covid variants, which the Greek alphabet must name associated with the virus only after geo-political analysis before baptism that neglects letters that are immune to their judgment, to violate an innocent omicron from vocabulary; but now very contagious in the opinion of a standardizing linguistic committee that did not ask the omicron of Rocci for permission to be associated with the infamous column. Saving the others. At the risk of ending this vocabulary, and before the epilogue of the pandemic. In order not to generate presumed judgments from an infector to that or that people. And peace if Montserrat Caballe from her superb chair laughs at her whining about body shaming and politically correctness. And some predictable tweets against the guy on TV who says fag, fat, and billiard head … and what a hell we burn all the movies until a few years ago,
We are throwing the ball where Francesco did not want with that judgment of his instead so careful, so necessary:
​​In the name of the protection of diversity, we end up by canceling the sense of every identity, with the risk of silencing the positions that defend a respectful idea and balanced of the various sensitivities.
Ball that you try to bring back to the field, at least remembering the correspondence of Cardinal Giacomo Biffi with the Carmelite Emanuela Ghini. So different, the cardinal and the cloistered one. but you can be friends from different positions:
“The important thing is that we continue to love each other, to dialogue frankly without plagiarizing each other; and without bullying “.
Without plagiarizing each other “. Frankness that is not taken for granted in ecclesiastical geography. And not only in that, between right and left helmets. There is no ecclesiasticism, notes a papable like Matteo Zuppi, presenting the posthumous volume of his predecessor Biffi on the chair of Bologna. Synodality. Parrhesia. Clarity. Do not fail your point of view, even defend it.
Beyond went Francesco:
In the name of the protection of diversity, we end up by canceling the sense of every identity, with the risk of silencing the positions that defend a respectful and balanced idea of ​​the various sensitivities. A single – dangerous – thought is being elaborated, forced to deny history, or worse still to rewrite it on the basis of contemporary categories, while every historical situation must be interpreted according to the hermeneutics of the time, not the hermeneutics of today.

Previous articleA first lady at the white house.
Next article“Same passion”, a viral slogan for equality in football