Renew Your Supernatural Motive, Constantly: Live Deliberately! --Don Bosco

"Always try to act on some principal of faith; never at random or for purely human motives. Always give great importance to whatever you do."

- St. John Bosco

"Miracle of the Monk and Roses": Medieval Origin of the Rosary

There is an ancient Medieval account of the origin of the The Most Holy Rosary of the Most Blessed Virgin Mary as given directly to a monk by Our Blessed Mother Mary called "The Miracle of the Monk and Roses."

Bystanders — actually robbers! — saw a young monk, stopping to rest in his journey, kneel down in the road and begin reciting “Ave, Maria...” As each prayer dropped from the monk’s lips, it turned into a rose, which was gathered up by the Virgin Mary standing nearby (the monk evidently didn’t see her, but the robbers did). The Virgin showed her pleasure at the gift of prayers by weaving the roses into a garland for her head. The robbers immediately repented and hastened to a priest to confess their sins, became monks, and, after a long and joyful lives in the monastic life died holy deaths!

The Miracle of the Monk and Roses: Bohun Hours, fol. 20r

The manuscript is the Bohun Hours, Royal Library, Copenhagen, MS Thott 547 4°, made in England around 1370–1387. On fol. 20r, in the lower border, is a three-part illumination explicitly identified by the manuscript catalogue as “The Miracle of the Monk and Roses.”

And, importantly, the Royal Library itself has the folio online:

Royal Library — Thott 547 4°, folio 20 recto

The catalogue gives the three scenes:

1. Left: A young monk kneels before an image of the Virgin and places a wreath of flowers on her head.
2. Center: The monk has become distressed because the season of roses has passed and he can no longer make his customary rose wreaths.
3. Right: This is the scene you are looking for. The monk kneels before the crowned Virgin, who holds a wreath; two or three robbers are shown in the adjacent grove, pointing toward the miraculous scene. Two horses and additional figures are also present.

The remarkable thing is that this isn't merely an image that happens to resemble the story. The scholarly catalogue calls the sequence “The Miracle of the Monk and Roses” and explicitly identifies the figures at the right as robbers.

But there is an interesting difference from your wording

The illumination does not seem to show the individual roses visibly coming out of the monk's mouth. Instead, the artist has compressed the miracle into the final scene: the monk is kneeling before Mary with the completed wreath, while the robbers stand off to the side witnessing it.

That may actually tell us something about medieval iconography: the artist apparently assumed that the viewer already knew the narrative and represented the result of the miracle, rather than laboriously depicting every Ave Maria becoming a rose.

There is also strong scholarly evidence that this particular story was indeed transmitted in versions involving a monk and robbers. A study of the medieval tradition specifically says that the robbers “perceive the Virgin gathering roses from the brother’s mouth and weaving them into garlands”, and cites the 1454 Mainz manuscript Unser Frauwen Rosengertlin as an early witness.

And there is an earlier textual witness

The Oxford database identifies the story as “Aves Seen as Roses,” from Jean Mielot's Miracles de Nostre Dame, with the rubric:

Dun jeusne religieulx qui par deuocion faisoit tous les jours des roses vng chappeau de roses...

“A young religious who out of devotion made every day a chaplet of roses...”

So we've now got a pretty solid chain:

medieval text → monk → Ave Marias → roses → Virgin → rose garland → robbers witness the miracle → medieval manuscript illumination actually depicting the monk, Virgin, garland, and robbers.

(Image and explanation of image: ChatGPT)

Leo, Francis's Bonaparte?

The Story (Google auto-translate from the original Spanish)

In recent months, a hypothesis has been frequently mentioned: Leo XIV is, or would be, Francis's Bonaparte. In other words, his mission would be to Bonapartize the reforms introduced by the Argentinian pontiff . This is likely to be the case; it may be entirely, or only partially. In any case, I believe it is still too early to determine. But the mere possibility warrants further consideration.

First, let's clarify the term. I'm not referring here to Bonapartism as Karl Marx understood it, but as liberal historians have understood it. They see Napoleon as the man who consolidated and disseminated the gains of the Revolution by neutralizing its violence. They argue that the Coup of 18 Brumaire was not a betrayal of the Revolution but its stabilization: Napoleon supposedly took the revolutionary principles and ideals of 1789 and institutionalized them permanently, while bringing the cycle of violence to a close (the Reign of Terror, the internal civil war, the instability of the Directory). In other words, with Bonaparte, "the Revolution ends" precisely because it is institutionalized and exported without the need for a guillotine.

Let's apply this hermeneutic to the case at hand: after the brutality of Francis's pontificate, with its arbitrary actions, rudeness, and various heresies, Leo would play the role of Napoleon: he would stabilize all those measures with a red mozzetta and good manners. This is, as I said, a hypothesis that we may finally be able to verify, to our horror, in a few years. We cannot know for sure now. But following the master Marcus Tullius Cicero, who asserts that "history is the teacher of life," let's see how history has behaved in similar cases.

Napoleon and Bonapartism

Napoleon Bonaparte exported revolutionary ideals with a gentle touch—beyond the wars. All of Europe and the new American nations that emerged during those years adopted the ideals proclaimed in the French Revolution, imposed in France through the Reign of Terror, and disseminated throughout Europe under Napoleon's aura of civilization.

It is true that the Congress of Vienna (September 1814–June 1815) was a deliberate and largely successful halt to this expansion, but structurally it was only temporary. This was because it could not dismantle Napoleon's legal and administrative framework. Furthermore, although it was able to suppress symptoms, it could not suppress causes, since constitutional liberalism and nationalism, the underlying forces, continued to operate in lodges, the underground press, universities, and secret societies throughout the Restoration. In short, in 1848, the "Springtime of the Peoples" confirmed that the reactionary order of 1815 could no longer contain the liberal and national forces it sought to stifle. If "Bonapartism" was the administrative dissemination of revolutionary principles without the Terror, the Viennese Restoration was the attempt—partially successful, but not definitive—to politically neutralize that dissemination without being able to undo its already established legal effects . If we outline what happened in those slightly more than fifty years (from 1789 to 1848), we have a revolutionary explosion imposed by terror; an expansion and stabilization with good manners; a reaction that manages to partially return to the Old Regime and a final triumph of the revolutionary ideals.

Bonapartism in the Church

Let us return to the hermeneutical exercise: Did a similar process occur in the Church? It would be too easy to think that it all began with Vatican II, but that was not the case; it began much earlier. Let us recall the figure of Cardinal Ercole Consalvi (1757-1824), Secretary of State to Pius VII. It was he who, accepting the revolutionary government of France and betraying the priests and bishops who had remained faithful to the Holy See and to traditional principles, “made a deal” with Napoleon; that is, he made a pact with the revolutionary ideals. With the Concordat of 1801 signed with Napoleon, Consalvi managed to wrest official recognition of Catholicism from the post-revolutionary French regime, even forcing the mass resignation of the entire previous French episcopate (both constitutional and non-constitutional) in order to reorganize the Church in France from scratch under papal authority, but according to the dictates of the new Emperor. This is where Vatican realpolitik is born : pure pragmatism when dealing with governments. At the commemorative congress for Consalvi held in the Vatican Museums in January 2024, Cardinal Parolin himself defined this policy as an approach that “defends and promotes the demands of the Gospel and knows how to adapt intelligently to the times,” providing answers “without romanticism” but through “continuous, discreet, and laborious work .” He further clarified: ecclesiastical realpolitik seeks “all possible solutions for the survival of local Catholicisms and, if necessary, for their development”—that is, contingent responses to contingent problems , without doctrinal preconceptions that would prevent negotiation with the current government, whatever its political leanings. Ultimately, this amounts to the practical acceptance of liberalism's triumph. Without declaring war against it, negotiations take place, seeking to obtain as many advantages as possible, even at the cost of abandoning certain principles. This is the policy applied to the countries of the communist bloc during the pontificate of Paul VI—we need only recall the suffering endured by Cardinals Mindszenty in Hungary, Slipij in Ukraine, and Stepinac in Croatia. And it is the policy currently being implemented in China : an arrangement with the communist regime, the practical acceptance of its principles in exchange for potential benefits for the Church and, of course, the betrayal of the Catholics who remained faithful.

Consalvism also had its Congress of Vienna: it was checked by two reactionary papacies, that of Gregory XVI (1831-1846) and that of Pius IX (1846-1878), a pope who turned out to be a coot, since, despite being a staunch liberal, he switched sides a couple of years after his election. With Leo XIII (1878-1903) things changed again, as foreign policy was handled by Cardinal Mariano Rampolla del Tindaro, a Consalvist. One need only recall the sad episode of the Ralliement , which responded to the dilemma: pragmatically accommodate the regime that emerged from the Revolution to preserve what was essential, or reject it outright as illegitimate? By 1890, France had been under the Third Republic for two decades, and the majority of French Catholics remained Legitimists or Orleanists at heart, hostile to the republican regime on principle and not only because of its anticlerical policies. In this situation, Leo XIII entrusted Cardinal Charles Lavigerie, Archbishop of Algiers and Carthage, with the mission of giving a public indication of the Holy See's intentions. Lavigerie did so on November 12, 1890, in the famous "Toast of Algiers," declaring that "when the will of a people has been clearly expressed... it becomes necessary to accept the existing form of government." The impact was enormous, and Leo XIII confirmed the new direction on February 16, 1892, with the encyclical Au milieu des sollicitudes. French Catholics, the Pope stated, could and should accept the Third Republic as a legitimate form of government, without this implying acceptance of its secularist laws, which remained entirely open to challenge. The underlying, explicit political objective was to form a large conservative party uniting Catholics and moderate republicans, isolating both anticlerical radicalism and intransigent monarchism. That's how it went for the Consalvistas and the rallies .

This liberal policy suffered another setback with the election of Saint Pius X. Rampolla was removed as Secretary of State and replaced by Rafael Merry del Val. Some say he was also from the Consalvi school of thought, that is, liberal, but I'm not so sure. What is certain is that the interregnum was short-lived, because with Benedict XV, a direct disciple of Rampolla, and his Secretary, Cardinal Gasparri, Consalvi's policies were consolidated, as Gasparri would also become Secretary of State under Pius XI. Two resounding and compelling historical events confirm the stabilization of Consalvi's policies within the Church . The first of these is the agreement reached by Gasparri with the Masonic government of Mexico, which ended the Cristero War by condemning all the Catholics who had risen up and given their lives in defense of and fidelity to Catholic doctrine. The second is the Lateran Pacts, also signed by Gasparri with Mussolini, by which the Church relinquished the sovereignty it had held for 1300 years. In both cases—and there are surely several more—it was a matter of pure pragmatism and a partial renunciation of many principles.

We can say, then, that Consalvism stabilized under the pontificate of Pius XI and was consolidated under that of Pius XII. This is a topic that can be debated, but I believe it was so. Eugenio Pacelli was Gasparri's right-hand man, and his pontificate, although it evokes nostalgia in many, was an example of Bonapartism, and I am referring to the discreet and slow, but relentless, permissiveness of the liberals' rise to power. It is no coincidence that Giovanni Battista Montini always held very high positions. If Pius XII had not been the Bonaparte of Consalvism, not only in the realm of the Church's foreign policy but also in theology, the catastrophe of Vatican II would have been impossible. All the bishops who participated were chosen by one of the last two Piuses.Two similar schemes

Here we see a scheme more or less similar to the previous one: a revolutionary explosion by the historical standards of the Church; a reaction that manages to partially return to the old Catholic regime and a final triumph of the ideals of liberalism.

Let's look at what has happened in recent decades, when political liberalism definitively permeated theology and internal politics of the Church. The Second Vatican Council and its subsequent spirit were a French Revolution without the guillotine, but cruel and ruthless nonetheless, which succeeded in imposing a new regime and even a new Creed . Everything was done quickly, brutally, and without regard for the consequences during the pontificate of Paul VI. John Paul II was Napoleon, for with good manners, overwhelming leadership, and firmness on certain moral issues, he Bonapartized the spirit of the Council, or, if you prefer, allowed its Bonapartization . I wrote a post on this subject in 2012, which I refer readers to so as not to repeat myself. The pontificate of Benedict XVI attempted to act as a brake, with its timid and hesitant style, almost like a Schubert impromptu. Then came Francis; They expected a hurricane that would turn the Church upside down, but it ended up being a blizzard that only served to disrupt everything and cover it in dust, with no benefit for anyone other than their own lusts.
Advertisement

Will Leo be Francisco's Napoleon?

Note 1: It is not my intention to make a moral judgment of the Vatican realpolitik inaugurated by Cardinal Consalvi. That is another discussion; here I have simply narrated the historical facts. It would be very easy to say simply that it was a capitulation of the principles upheld by the Church. The issue is much more complex.

Note 2: I have been struck by the fact that some good friends have been viciously criticizing Pope Leo XIV for mentioning in France the revolutionary motto of "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity". But as I discussed with one of them in X, such a gesture is not a novelty but the repetition of a two-hundred-year-old pattern: just as Pius VII, after the Terror, negotiated the Concordat of 1801 with Napoleon—heir of the Revolution—without thereby endorsing its ideological origin, and just as Leo XIII, in Au milieu des sollicitudes (1892), asked French Catholics for the ralliement to the Third Republic, distinguishing the form of government from the obedience due to the constituted power (Rom 13:1), Leo XIV, in the Élysée Palace, did not challenge "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity" as hostile vocabulary, but rather renamed it, affirming that its true foundation lies in the Gospel—the same patristic logic of "the plundering of the Egyptians" applied to political language.

Joe Schmid & Noah McKay, Princeton PhD Candidates Convert

Joe Schmid

I’m a Philosophy PhD candidate at Princeton University. I graduated with a B.A. in philosophy from Purdue University in 2022. On the scholarly level, I’ve published articles in metaphysics, philosophy of religion, and philosophy of time. I’ve also authored the books Existential Inertia and Classical Theistic Proofs (Springer, 2023, with Daniel Linford) and The Majesty of Reason: A Short Guide to Critical Thinking in Philosophy (Kindle Direct Publishing, 2020). On the popular level, I create lecture videos and host discussions on my YouTube channel, Majesty of Reason. I also run a blog by the same name.

My primary research is in metaphysics, philosophy of religion, and philosophy of mind. I focus in particular on persistence, infinity and infinitary paradoxes, modality, arguments for and against God’s existence, and psychophysical laws.

When I’m not doing philosophy, I’m probably either running, playing soccer, biking, or cuddling with my dog.



Noah McCay

I’m a PhD student in philosophy at Princeton University. I received my master’s degree in philosophy from the University of Edinburgh in 2023.

I’m interested in epistemology, metaethics, metaphysics, and philosophy of religion. I’ve published papers on some of these topics in journals such as Analysis, Synthese, Episteme, and Faith and Philosophy. For more information about my research, check out my CV and PhilPapers page.

Lately, I’ve wondered about whether insights into the evolution of human cognition should lead us to reconsider our moral and religious perspectives on the world. I’ve also wondered about what kinds of objects human minds are (material? immaterial? simple? composite? enduring? instantaneous?).

Joe Schmid's Curriculum Vitae

Joseph C. Schmid

Princeton University | js9105@princeton.edu | www.josephschmid.com

Updated Sep 27th, 2026

AREAS OF SPECIALTY

Metaphysics

Philosophy of Religion

AREAS OF COMPETENCE

Philosophy of Mind

Logic

EDUCATION

BA in Philosophy with highest distinction, Purdue University (Aug 2019–May 2022)

PhD in Philosophy, Princeton University (Aug 2023–Present) [in progress]

RESEARCH

Book

1. Existential Inertia and Classical Theistic Proofs (2023, with Daniel Linford), Springer.

Articles

19. “The Problem of Psychonomic Harmony” (Forthcoming), Philosophy and Phenomenological Research.

18. “Room for Improvement: Why Finitist Arguments Don’t Check Out” (Forthcoming), Analytic Philosophy (with Troy Dana).

17. “Grim Reaper Paradoxes and Patchwork Principles: Severing the Case for Finitism” (2026), The Journal of Philosophy 123: 137–163 (with Troy Dana).

16. “Symmetry Lost: A Modal Ontological Argument for Atheism?” (2026), Noûs 60: 313–327 (with Peter Fritz and Tien-Chun Lo).

15. “Benardete Paradoxes, Causal Finitism, and the Unsatisfiable Pair Diagnosis” (2025), Mind 134: 397–421 (with Alex Malpass).

14. “The End is Near: Grim Reapers and Endless Futures” (2024), Mind 133: 1057–1077.

13. “Ontological Arguments” (2024), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, eds. Edward N. Zalta & Uri Nodelman (with Graham Oppy and Joshua Rasmussen).

12. “Benardete paradoxes, patchwork principles, and the infinite past” (2024), Synthese 203: 51.

11. “Symmetry’s revenge” (2023), Analysis 83: 723–731.

10. “Branching Actualism and Cosmological Arguments” (2023), Philosophical Studies 180: 1951–1973 (with Alex Malpass).

9. “A Step-by-step Argument for Causal Finitism” (2023), Erkenntnis 88: 2097–2122.

8. “Naturalism, classical theism, and first causes” (2023), Religious Studies 59: 63–77.

7. “From Modal Collapse to Providential Collapse” (2022), Philosophia 50: 1413–1435.

6. “The fruitful death of modal collapse arguments” (2022), International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 91: 3–22.

5. “The aloneness argument against classical theism” (2022), Religious Studies 58: 401–419 (with R.T. Mullins).

4. “Classical Theism, Arbitrary Creation, and Reason-Based Action” (2022), Sophia 61: 565–579.

3. “Existential inertia and the Aristotelian proof” (2021), International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 89: 201–220.

2. “Simply Unsuccessful: The Neo-Platonic Proof of God’s Existence” (2021), European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 13: 129–156.

1. “Stage One of the Aristotelian Proof: A Critical Appraisal” (2021), Sophia 60: 781–796.

Presentations and contest papers

10. “Against Causal Finitism”, Princeton Metaphysics Reading Group (April 8, 2026).

9. “Psychonomic Harmony: A New Puzzle”, Christopher Newport University Philosophy of Religion Workshop (Oct 16–18, 2025) and Princeton Metaphysics Reading Group (October 8, 2025).

8. “Symmetry Lost: Anselm, Adams, and Atheism”, 2025 Eastern Conference of the Society of Christian Philosophers: The Philosophical Legacy of Robert Merrihew Adams (October 3, 2025).

7. “Symmetry breakers for the modal ontological argument”, Princeton Project in Philosophy & Religion Reading Group (April 23, 2025).

6. “The Grim Reaper Paradox and Causal Finitism”, panel speaker at the 2025 Pacific APA (April 18, 2025).

5. “Fellow travelers and plenitudinous ontologies”, Princeton Metaphysics Reading Group (February 26, 2025).

4. “Symmetry lost”, Virginia Commonwealth University Philosophy of Religion Workshop (Oct 17–19, 2024) and Princeton Metaphysics Reading Group (October 8, 2024).

3. “An unsatisfactory way of being an ontological pluralist”, Princeton Metaphysics Reading Group (April 23, 2024).

2. “Consciousness, Causation, and Explanation: A Construction Argument”, The Society of Christian Philosophers Conference (April 5–6, 2019), College of Southern Nevada, Las Vegas, NV. Conference paper accepted via blind review.

1. “The Indeterminacy of the Physical and the Principle of Sufficient Reason” (July 2019), The Conscious Machine, Azusa Pacific University. Contest paper won via blind review.

AWARDS

1. Nov, 2025. Winner of Emergent Ventures grant ($25,000) to complete a co-authored book on new arguments in philosophy of religion.

2. May, 2022. Graduated Purdue University with highest distinction (B.A., Philosophy).

3. Feb, 2022. Purdue University College of Liberal Arts Outstanding Senior Award.

4. Feb, 2021. Eric L. Clitheroe Memorial Scholarship (first place).

5. Feb, 2021. William L. Rowe Scholarship in Philosophy (Purdue University).

6. Feb, 2021. Purdue Department of Philosophy Outstanding Sophomore Award.

7. Jul, 2019. Azusa Pacific University’s The Conscious Machine call for arguments essay prize.

8. Jan, 2019. Purdue University presidential scholarship.

TEACHING

1. Fall 2026. Teaching Assistant for Introductory Logic (PHI 201).

2. Spring 2025. Teaching Assistant for Lara Buchak’s Philosophy, Religion, and Existential Commitments (PHI 211).

3. Spring 2025. Guest lectured about the ethics of charitable giving for Lara Buchak’s Philosophy, Religion, and Existential Commitments (PHI 211).

4. Fall 2024. Teaching Assistant for Kimberly Brewer’s Philosophy and the Modern Mind (PHI 200).

5. Fall 2023. Guest lectured about epistemic partiality in friendship for Elizabeth Harman’s The Ethics of Love and Sex (PHI 390).

SERVICE

Served as anonymous reviewer for Mind (3x), Noûs (2x), Australasian Journal of Philosophy (5x), Analysis (1x), The Philosophical Quarterly (1x), Ergo (1x), Routledge (1x), American Philosophical Quarterly (1x), Erkenntnis (1x), Synthese (3x), Inquiry (1x), Philosophy (1x), Philosophia (1x), Acta Analytica (1x), Dialectica (1x), The Review of Metaphysics (1x), Faith and Philosophy (3x), Religious Studies (5x), Sophia (6x), American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly (1x), Agatheos: European Journal for Philosophy of Religion (1x), TheoLogica: An International Journal for Philosophy of Religion and Philosophical Theology (2x).

Served on Princeton’s Prospective Visit Committee (Spring 2024).

Organiser for Princeton’s Workshop in Normative Philosophy (AY 2024-25).

Organiser for Princeton’s MAP (Minorities and Philosophy) series (AY 2025-26).

Organiser for Princeton’s Compass workshop (AY 2025-26).

Served on the organizing committee for The 2025 Eastern Conference of the Society of Christian Philosophers: The Philosophical Legacy of Robert Merrihew Adams.

PUBLIC PHILOSOPHY

1. I create lecture videos and host discussions with philosophers on my YouTube channel Majesty of Reason. My videos have over 2 million views in total and have been used in undergraduate courses such as Paul Draper’s Philosophy and Probability (PHIL 350) at Purdue University.

2. I self-published The Majesty of Reason: A Short Guide to Critical Thinking in Philosophy (2020, 222 pages), a book aimed to help people cultivate critical thinking and philosophical reasoning skills.

3. I tutored students and interested lay people in philosophy during Fall 2021, Summer/Fall/Winter 2022, Spring/Summer 2023.

4. I am the Head of Instruction for the Reason & Rationality summer program, which teaches philosophy to high school students.

REFERENCES

Joshua L. Rasmussen, Baylor University (josh_rasmussen@baylor.edu)

Graham Oppy, Monash University (graham.oppy@monash.edu)

Paul Draper, Purdue University (pdraper@purdue.edu)

Jan Cover, Purdue University (jacover@purd

"Christianity is Essential to Europe" Pope Leo XIV in France

"To understand [the long history of Europe] one cannot omit...Saint Benedict, whom Saint Paul VI proclaimed patron saint of Europe in 1964, calling him "messenger of peace, architect of unity, teacher of civilization." Aid to the poor, the sick, and the elderly; the education of children and universities; hospitals and medicine; architecture and engineering; the development of science; law and the organization of cities and states themselves: so many areas in Europe have been profoundly influenced by Saint Benedict and his monks! Without this monastic heritage, European civilization, as we know it, would not exist. Here in Metz, thanks to the work of Saint Chrodegang, among others, a Benedictine spirit of fraternity, communion, and shared life was palpable. From here, Gregorian chant spread throughout the Carolingian territories, bringing harmony and beauty to the entire continent. One cannot speak of Europe without mentioning Christianity."

Pope Leo XIV's visit to France: A relief after the storm

1 October 2026, EL WANDERER (English translation by Google, original Spanish follows.)

Last week, Pope Leo XIV visited France. It was his second significant trip to European countries, and, as with his visit to Spain, I believe it was a great success. I said it then, and I repeat it now with even greater conviction: I believe we are witnessing a return to the style of John Paul II, with all the pros and cons that entails. And, consequently, the definitive overcoming of the Franciscan style. I know that this last point is a hotly debated topic within conservative and traditionalist circles, and I will delve into it in two articles that I will publish next week. I am not interested in addressing it here, nor in the comments section; we will do so in due course. But I am interested in honestly analyzing the papal trip to France. And I emphasize that my opinions are based on what was said during this trip, and not on his decisions or speeches delivered in Rome, or on other occasions. In other words, I am not making a sweeping judgment on the nascent pontificate of Leo XIV, but rather on a very small portion of it: his apostolic journey to France.

The first thing that struck me was the reaction of the secular and anti-Christian press. It ranged from astonishment to silence. The blog Messa in Latino recently published a brief review of these articles, which is worth revisiting. Progressive journalism, which is practically the entire press, couldn't deny the enthusiasm it generated, although it was clear in its assessment. This is an unmistakable sign that it took them by surprise. While the usually loquacious Elisabetta Piqué remained completely silent, María Laura Avignolo, Clarín 's correspondent in France, stated that "Rarely has a pontiff been so radical in his call to the spiritual imperative of conversion." She then added that in Leo XIV's words appeared: "A spirituality that the Catholic Church has always professed, but about which it has spoken much less since the Second Vatican Council . "

In France, Bernadette Sauvaget, a journalist for Libération —the newspaper founded by Sartre, a historic emblem of the French left—specializing in religion, was invited to French television to comment on the vigil for Leo XIV before 80,000 young people at the Stade de France. There, visibly uncomfortable, she said that she was terrified to see the Catholic resurgence among young French people . Not only had they not expected the massive influx of the faithful to the papal celebrations, and especially not young people rather than nostalgic old folks, but they also hadn't expected the clarity and forcefulness of the papal message. They believed that, with Francis, the reaffirmation of the Catholic faith had been definitively buried. And that has not been the case.

I decided to read all of the Pope's addresses in France, a task that took me an entire morning but was edifying. Not since I read Pope Benedict XVI's Spe salvi , well over a decade ago, had I been so edified by papal texts. I can say that, during his trip to France, Pope Leo confirmed us in the faith, which is his specific task. How else can these words , for example, be described ?

Yes, God is the Lord of history and, whatever happens, He leads it towards salvation: in Christ all evil has an end, precisely because the end becomes the beginning of a new and eternal life.

Or these others :

Yes, eternal life is a firm and sure promise that the Lord makes to us. He has already obtained it for us through his death on the cross and his resurrection, and he makes it a reality in us every day through the grace of baptism.

One of the most striking aspects is the centrality of Jesus Christ, which appears in all his words. The Lord is always at the heart of his sermons and speeches delivered in religious settings. We must remember that we come from times when the Argentine pontiff wallowed in the mire of cheap sociologism and preferred, for example, not to give the apostolic blessing so as not to offend non-Christians. The difference is enormous.

And another point in that same vein: only once in all his speeches, and then only in a very minor way, did he mention the famous synodality. He did so when he addressed the French bishops in Lourdes. Just once! Not even when he met in Paris with the “synodal assembly” of that diocese did he refer to the topic. Let us remember that until a few months ago, “synodality” was the magic word that had to appear in every speech by nuns, priests, and bishops. My impression, which I've had since the first months of his pontificate, is that Leo will slowly cool down the issue, and the synod on synodality will end up dying of starvation. We shall see.

But it's pointless to dwell on comparing the differences with the previous pontificate. They are obvious, and what is obvious needs no proof. Let's focus on other positive and striking aspects. One of them is the recurring theme in almost all of Pope Leo's addresses of the remembrance of the saints of France, who are legion. And he is not referring to contemporary and ecumenical saints of dubious quality, but to the most venerable saints of the Firstborn Daughter of the Church, those who "worship the true God." He said in his homily in the Place de la Concorde:

The living water of the Holy Spirit has been poured out in abundance and continues to bear fruit in the Church through missionaries and witnesses present in every culture and among every people. This water makes fruitful all that it touches and transforms to produce its fruit, namely, the holiness of those who worship the true God and serve their brothers and sisters with charity and generosity. In this beautiful country of France, many have been nourished by this living water throughout the centuries and have consecrated their lives entirely to good: the early martyrs such as Blandina, Pothinus, and Irenaeus; the holy founders of religious orders; the holy bishops such as Martin of Tours and Francis de Sales; the men and women with hearts sensitive to the needs of their fellow human beings, such as Vincent de Paul, Frédéric Ozanam, Jeanne Jugan, and many others.

He reminded the young people :

Look to the example of the saints: even in the face of persecution, these brothers and sisters of ours paved the way for peace. Look to those priests passionate for Christ, like Saint Eugene de Mazenod and Saint John Vianney; contemplate the mystical beauty of Saint Thérèse of Lisieux; Blessed Pauline Jaricot, fervent in charity and mission; the courage of the fifty martyrs of the apostolate during the Second World War, who served their brothers and sisters to the point of sacrificing their lives. The saints changed the course of history , leading many from suffering to hope, because they first changed their own hearts, transforming them in the light of faith.

And later, in the same speech to young people:

Furthermore, we have the saints as allies: they are friends who sustain us in trials. Dear friends, when life's decisions demand courage, turn to their intercession and imitate their example : as we have sung in the litanies, the encouragement of the saints assures us that we are never alone in prayer, never alone in the Church.

Not only that, but he proposed Saint Joan of Arc as an example of a strong woman (I don't know if Benedict XVI would have gone that far):

In this regard, the apostle gives us a third verb: to fight. Indeed, fleeing from evil and striving for good implies fighting. Yes, fighting as Saint Paul did, often depicted with a sword in his hands , a symbol of the Word of God, “the sword of the Spirit” (Eph 6:17). This verb resonates powerfully here in France, the land of Saint Joan of Arc, a young woman who knew how to fight with audacity .

Another very positive point is that he mentioned on several occasions the importance of the liturgy in the Christian life and in the conversion of catechumens, whose numbers have increased exponentially in recent years. He told the priests and consecrated persons:

To you who celebrate the Eucharist daily, I ask that you ensure that liturgical celebrations are always lived with dignity and decorum, even where smaller communities gather. Be conscious heirs of the Fathers and Saints of the Church who, throughout the centuries, have handed down to us the profound meaning and beauty of the liturgy, always bearing witness to great humility before the Mystery being celebrated. The Second Vatican Council, whose richness owes much to France, gathered and deepened this heritage in an eminent way, recognizing its central place in the life of the Church (cf. Sacrosanctum Concilium, 10). I therefore exhort all of you—bishops, priests, deacons, and consecrated persons—to cultivate a genuine love for the liturgy and to be witnesses and servants of the prophetic, priestly, and royal vocation of all the People of God.

And on another occasion :

The liturgy, in fact, cannot be considered something "subsequent" to catechesis, as if it merely put into practice what was learned during the journey. The liturgy manifests and actualizes the mystery of Christ's Paschal Mystery and, therefore, is the event capable of revealing the meaning of the Good News and communicating the very life of God . With its rhythms, its language, and its rites, it forms an integral part of the journey of conversion and preparation for the sacraments.

It wasn't these issues, which we Catholics know are the most important, that astonished progressivism, but rather those related to the temporal order, or better said, the crystal-clear way in which he addressed them, in a France that prides itself on its secularism. The Jesuit Spadaro must have been dumbfounded listening to the papal speeches because, according to his calculations, Leo XIV would only refer to these matters in Lourdes, before a small, focused audience. And he was referring to issues like abortion, euthanasia, and religious education. But that didn't happen. He addressed them in Lourdes, but he also addressed them to Macron at the Élysée Palace and to European leaders in Metz.

He stated the following:

But no human law should make us lose sight of the certainty of human dignity. On the contrary, precisely in the name of this inalienable dignity of the human person, the temptation to take life under the pretext of false compassion must be firmly rejected. It is impossible to consider ending a life normal. What is legal is not necessarily moral. No one has the right, ever, based on laboratory algorithms, to decide on the life of a particular embryo or a particular elderly person! Medicine can never become the servant of programmed death!

He expressed himself in similar terms on another occasion. Regarding religious education, he told the bishops:

I urge you to remain vigilant in defending the freedom and rights of the Church to evangelize, to educate in true freedom, and to publicly practice worship, so that charity may be visibly exercised in the name of Jesus Christ. However, Catholic education cannot, in any way, renounce its educational project, a Christ-centered project that aims at the integral development of the human person in all its dimensions: spiritual, cultural, intellectual, moral, and social. Therefore, no one should be surprised that any Catholic school offers opportunities to encounter Jesus Christ and hear his Word. And even less should any student be marginalized in their class simply for believing in Jesus.

Regarding these thorny issues, which he did not avoid but rather confronted clearly, he responded at the press conference he gave to journalists on his return trip, who objected that he had gotten involved in politics:

There may be politicians, let's say, on the left or the right, who maintain that religion should be confined solely to the private sphere; let people do what they want on their own, but as a state we must stay out of it. Actually, when I went to France, I did so primarily to preach the Gospel, to announce the Good News, to reaffirm what Jesus Christ himself says when he affirms: “I am the way, the truth, and the life,” that is, to proclaim the truth that Jesus offers us. The defense of life is a subject that, as you all know, the Church teaches and in which it deeply believes. And so, on the one hand, I knew, obviously, that a law [on euthanasia] had recently been passed in France, while in other European countries and in other parts of the world issues related to end-of-life care were being debated. […] Therefore, I would say that, if this is politics, I have done it, but not to interfere in French politics. I did it to teach what the Church truly believes in.

In Metz, meeting with cultural figures and European leaders, Pope Leo stated :

To understand this long history, however, one cannot omit another father of Europe: Saint Benedict, whom Saint Paul VI proclaimed patron saint of Europe in 1964, calling him "messenger of peace, architect of unity, teacher of civilization." Aid to the poor, the sick, and the elderly; the education of children and universities; hospitals and medicine; architecture and engineering; the development of science; law and the organization of cities and states themselves: so many areas in Europe have been profoundly influenced by Saint Benedict and his monks! Without this monastic heritage, European civilization, as we know it, would not exist. Here in Metz, thanks to the work of Saint Chrodegang, among others, a Benedictine spirit of fraternity, communion, and shared life was palpable. From here, Gregorian chant spread throughout the Carolingian territories, bringing harmony and beauty to the entire continent. One cannot speak of Europe without mentioning Christianity .

And in that same context, he also said:

To young people I say: have the courage to live responsibly the mission of building peace—in your hearts, in your relationships, in your families, in schools and universities, in the life of your cities, your towns, and throughout Europe. Do not be afraid to start a family, to have children, to defend the dignity of every person, from the first moment in the mother's womb until their last breath.
Advertisement

Finally, it was predictable that the Roman pontiff would refer to the painful wound that the episcopal consecrations of Écone inflicted on the Church, since it is in France where this movement is strongest. And he did so, as an exhortation, on two occasions. In a homily

Therefore, put communion with the Successor of Peter and with the Church before your personal sensibilities, in order to cultivate the unity of the people of God.

And in the speech to the bishops:

This unity is not mere uniformity, but rather allows all authentically Catholic sensibilities to converge naturally in a common profession of faith, through obedience to legitimate pastors and, in particular, to the Successor of Peter , “the perpetual and visible principle and foundation of the unity of faith and communion” (LG, 18). It is a dynamic unity nourished by the Tradition of the Church—from the Fathers to the Second Vatican Council—and by the post-conciliar Magisterium.

As I said, I read all the addresses given by the Holy Father during his trip to France. Naturally, they also contain some trivial things and a few others—very few—that I didn't particularly like. But that's normal and to be expected. What I don't find normal or fair, though it is predictable, is that some maximalists or insatiable critics have begun to warn, in a condescending and admonitory tone: "Don't be fooled by Latin and solemnity!" And they pointed to a single passage from his first day of the trip, in which he speaks of the "ideals" of the French Revolution, as the reason for this warning. There is no integrity or honesty there: they disregard all the Pope's speeches to attack him for a single paragraph, a text which, moreover, they seek to interpret in the most twisted way possible.

The Holy Father said :

France has contributed genuine achievements to the world, including the recognition of the “Human Rights” inherent in the nature of the human person, particularly the right to religious freedom. This unwavering commitment to the inherent dignity of every human being is reflected in its national motto. Liberty, equality, and fraternity are not merely words inscribed on the pediments of its public buildings, but rather refer to universal ethical imperatives that also find in the Gospel message an inexhaustible source of inspiration and fulfillment.

The gravity of these statements, according to them, lies in the fact that the revolutionary motto is being based on the Gospel. But they don't read the whole sentence. The Pope doesn't say that liberty, equality, and fraternity are founded on the Gospel, as if the Sermon on the Mount were a draft of the 1789 Declaration. Rather, he says that these ethical principles also find in the Gospel message "an inexhaustible source of inspiration and fulfillment," and he anchors rights in the nature of the human person, not in the general will or Rousseau's social contract. The direction of the argument is exactly the reverse of what the maximalists criticize, since it doesn't go from the Revolution to the Gospel, but from the Gospel to words that, uprooted from their origins, wander orphaned across the facades of France. It is the old logic of grace that doesn't destroy nature but perfects it, and that also perfects, when it can, the language of humankind.

None of this is new. Saint Paul, at the Areopagus, did not begin his preaching by denouncing the idolatry of the Athenians and destroying altars, although his spirit boiled at the sight of the city full of idols; instead, he took the inscription from one of those pagan altars, Agnṓstōi theṓi , “to the unknown god,” and said to them: “What you worship without knowing, this I proclaim to you.” And to further scandalize the insatiable of that time, he quoted a Gentile poet, Aratus of Soli: “For we are also of his lineage.” Saint Justin saw in the wisdom of the Greeks scattered seeds of the Logos; Saint Augustine ordered the Egyptians to be stripped of their gold to put it at the service of Christ; And St. Gregory the Great wrote to Abbot Melito that he should not demolish the Anglo-Saxon temples, but rather purify them with holy water and consecrate them to the true God, so that the people, going to the customary places, might learn to worship the One they did not know. The Church never believed that evangelization required beginning by burning the vocabulary of the person being addressed, but always preferred to baptize them.

And all the more so when the vocabulary is, strictly speaking, stolen . Because the revolutionary triad didn't spring from nothing: there is no fraternity without a common Father, the equality of men was proclaimed by Saint Paul to the Galatians long before the National Assembly, and freedom is that for which Christ set us free. Chesterton saw it with his usual acuity: the modern world is full of old Christian virtues that have gone mad because they were separated from one another and wander about alone. Restoring their sanity is not surrendering to the Revolution, but rather reclaiming what was always ours. And anyone who thinks that a Pope cannot pronounce those words without blessing the guillotine should explain why Saint Paul could quote Aratus without incensing Zeus.

And I'll end with a question and a prophecy . What will Leo XIV's visit to Argentina be like? The French—it has to be said—far surpassed the Spanish. Everything was of higher quality in Gaul, from the liturgies to the famous vigil with the youth. But I think our Spanish brothers should rest easy: the Argentinians, this time unlike in football, will easily beat them in tackiness, vulgarity, and bad taste. That's what I fear based on some of the information that's coming in. At the vigil with the youth, for example, Abel Pinto will be singing! Luckily, the suggestion of one of the priests in charge of the organization, Father Fabrizio Maranzana (look him up and you'll know who he is), wasn't followed. He proposed that the host of the event be the model and wife of countless husbands and lovers, Pampita Ardohain. Will Flor de la V. or Lizi Tagliani replace her?

And my prophecy : The Holy Father will speak a few truths that the government will not like at all, and that's to be expected. But he will also speak a few truths that the bishops, widowed by Francis, will not like at all, bishops who, like zombies, continue to wander about, damaging and terrorizing Argentine soil.
__

La visita del papa León XIV a Francia. Un alivio después de la tempestad
1 de octubre de 2026 por elwanderer

La semana pasada el Papa León XIV visitó Francia. Fue su segundo viaje relevante a países europeos y, tal como ocurrió en España, creo que fue un gran éxito. Lo dije en ese momento y lo repito ahora con más convicción: creo que estamos frente a un retorno del juanpablismo, con los pro y los contra que eso supone. Y, consecuentemente, la superación definitiva del francisquismo. Sé que esto último es un tema muy discutido en el ámbito conservador y tradicionalista, y lo profundizaré en dos artículos que publicaré la semana próxima. No me interesa tratarlo aquí ni tampoco en los comentarios: lo haremos en su momento. Pero sí me interesa analizar con honestidad el viaje papal a tierras galas. Y destaco que mis opiniones son sobre lo dicho en este viaje, y no sobre sus decisiones o discursos pronunciados en Roma, o en otras ocasiones. Es decir, no estoy emitiendo un juicio en bloque sobre el incipiente pontificado de León XIV sino sobre una porción muy reducida de él: su viaje apostólico a Francia.

Lo primero que me ha llamado mucho la atención ha sido la reacción de la prensa laica y anticristiana. Se ha movido entre la estupefacción al silencio. El blog Messa in Latino publicó hace pocos días una breve reseña de esos artículos que es interesante revisar. El periodismo progresista, que es la casi totalidad, no ha podido negar el entusiasmo provocado aunque ha sido claro en su apreciación. Signo inequívoco de que los ha tomado por sorpresa. Mientras la locuaz Elisabetta Piqué se llamó a un absoluto silencio, María Laura Avignolo, corresponsal de Clarín en Francia, afirmo que “Pocas veces un pontífice ha sido tan radical en su llamado al imperativo espiritual de la conversión”. Y luego agregó que en las palabras de León XIV aparecía: “Una espiritualidad que la Iglesia Católica siempre ha profesado. Pero de la que ha hablado mucho menos desde el Concilio Vaticano II”.

En Francia, Bernadette Sauvaget, periodista de Libération —el diario que fundó Sartre, insignia histórica de la izquierda francesa— especializada en religión, fue invitada a la television francesa para comentar la vigilia de León XIV ante 80.000 jóvenes en el Stade de France. Y allí dijo, visiblemente incómoda, que le causaba pavor ver el resurgimiento católico de los jóvenes franceses. No solamente no esperaban la afluencia masiva de fieles a las celebraciones pontificias, y sobre todo jóvenes y no ancianos nostálgicos, sino que no esperaban la claridad y contundencia del mensaje pontificio. Creían que, con Francisco, la reivindicación de la fe católica había quedado ya definitivamente sepultada. Y no ha sido así.

Decidí leer todas las alocuciones del Papa en Francia, tarea que me llevó una mañana entera pero fue edificante. Desde que leí hace mucho más de una década Spe salvi, del Papa Benedicto XVI, no había sido edificado de ese modo por los textos papales. Puedo decir que, durante su viaje a Francia, el Papa León nos confirmó en la fe, que es su tarea específica. ¿De qué otro modo pueden calificarse, por ejemplo, estas palabras?

Sí, Dios es el Señor de la historia y, pase lo que pase, la conduce hacia la salvación: en Cristo todo mal tiene un término, precisamente porque el final se convierte en el comienzo de una vida nueva y eterna.

Sí, la vida eterna es una promesa firme y segura que el Señor nos hace. Ya nos la ha alcanzado con su muerte en la cruz y su resurrección, y ya la hace realidad cada día en nosotros por la gracia del bautismo.

Uno de los aspectos que saltan rápidamente a la vista, es la centralidad de Jesucristo que aparecen en todas su palabras. El Señor aparece siempre como el núcleo de sus sermones y discursos pronunciados en ámbito religioso. Recordemos que venimos de épocas en los cuales el pontífice argentino vivía revolviendo el fango de un sociologismo barato y prefería, por ejemplo, no dar la bendición apostólica para no ofender a los no cristianos. La diferencia es abismal.

Y otro elemento en ese mismo sentido: solamente en una ocasión en todas sus alocuciones, y de un modo muy secundario, habló de la famosa sinodalidad. Lo hizo cuando se dirigió en Lourdes a los obispos franceses. ¡Sólo una vez! Ni siquiera cuando se reunió en París con la “asamblea sinodal” de esa diócesis hizo referencia al tema. Recordemos que hasta hace algunos meses, “sinodalidad” era la palabrita mágica que debía aparecer necesariamente en cualquier discurso de monjas, curas y obispos. Mi impresión, y la tengo desde los primeros meses de su pontificado, es que León enfriará lentamente la cuestión y el sínodo de la sinodalidad terminarán muriendo de inanición. Veremos.

Pero no vale detenernos a comparar las diferencias con el pontificado anterior. Son evidentes, y lo evidente no necesita ser demostrado. Concentrémonos en otras cuestiones positivas y llamativas. Una de ellas es la recurrencia en casi todas las intervenciones del Papa León al recuerdo de los santos de Francia, que son legión. Y no hace referencia a santos contemporáneos y ecuménicos de dudosa calidad, sino a los santos más rancios de la Hija Primogénita de la Iglesia, aquellos que “adoran al Dios verdadero”. Dijo en su homilía en la Place de la Concorde:

El agua viva del Espíritu Santo se ha derramado en abundancia y sigue dando fruto en la Iglesia a través de los misioneros y los testigos presentes en todas las culturas y entre todos los pueblos. Esta agua fecunda cuanto se deja tocar y transformar por ella para producir su fruto, es decir, la santidad de quienes adoran al Dios verdadero y sirven a sus hermanos y hermanas con caridad y generosidad. En este hermoso país que es Francia, muchos se han saciado de esta agua viva a lo largo de los siglos y han consagrado totalmente su vida al bien: los primeros mártires como Blandina, Potino e Ireneo; los santos fundadores y fundadoras de órdenes religiosas, los santos obispos como Martín de Tours y Francisco de Sales; los hombres y mujeres con un corazón sensible a las necesidades de sus semejantes, como Vicente de Paúl, Federico Ozanam, Juana Jugan y muchos otros.

A los jóvenes les recordó:

Miren el ejemplo de los santos: incluso en la persecución, estos hermanos y hermanas nuestros abrieron caminos de paz. Miren a aquellos sacerdotes apasionados por Cristo, como san Eugenio de Mazenod y san Juan María Vianney; contemplen la belleza mística de santa Teresa de Lisieux; a la beata Pauline Jaricot, ferviente en la caridad y la misión; el valor de los cincuenta mártires del apostolado, en tiempos de la Segunda Guerra Mundial, que sirvieron a sus hermanos y hermanas hasta el punto de sacrificar sus vidas. Los santos cambiaron el curso de la historia, haciendo que muchos pasaran del sufrimiento a la esperanza, porque primero cambiaron sus propios corazones, transformándolos a la luz de la fe.

Y más adelante, en el mismo discurso a los jóvenes:

Además, contamos con los santos como aliados: son amigos que nos sostienen en las pruebas. Queridos amigos, cuando las decisiones de la vida exijan valentía, recurran a su intercesión e imiten su ejemplo: como hemos cantado en las letanías, el aliento de los santos nos asegura que nunca estamos solos en la oración, nunca estamos solos en la Iglesia.

No sólo eso, sino que les propuso como ejemplo de mujer luchadora a Santa Juana de Arco (no sé si Benedicto XVI se habría animado a tanto):

A este respecto, el apóstol nos entrega un tercer verbo: luchar. De hecho, huir del mal y tender al bien implica luchar. Sí, luchar como lo hizo san Pablo, representado a menudo con una espada en las manos, signo de la Palabra de Dios, «la espada del Espíritu» (Ef 6,17). Este verbo resuena con fuerza aquí en Francia, tierra de santa Juana de Arco, una joven que supo luchar con audacia.

Otra cuestión muy positiva es que mencionó en varias ocasiones la importancia de la liturgia en la vida cristiana y en la conversión de los catecúmeno , que han aumentado exponencialmente en los últimos años. Dijo a los sacerdotes y consagrados:

A ustedes, que celebran diariamente la Eucaristía, les pido que velen para que las celebraciones litúrgicas se vivan siempre con dignidad y decoro, también allí donde se reúnen comunidades más pequeñas. Sean herederos conscientes de los Padres y de los Santos de la Iglesia que, a lo largo de los siglos, nos han transmitido el significado profundo y la belleza de la liturgia, dando siempre testimonio de una gran humildad ante el Misterio celebrado. El Concilio Vaticano II, cuya riqueza debe mucho a Francia, recogió y profundizó de manera eminente esta herencia, reconociendo su lugar central en la vida eclesial (cf. Sacrosanctum Concilium, 10). Les exhorto, por tanto, a todos ustedes, obispos, sacerdotes, diáconos y consagrados, a cultivar un amor auténtico por la liturgia y a ser testigos y servidores de la vocación profética, sacerdotal y real de todo el pueblo de Dios.

Y en otra ocasión:

La liturgia, en efecto, no puede considerarse una realidad “posterior” a la catequesis, como si en ella se pusiera simplemente en práctica lo aprendido durante el itinerario. La liturgia manifiesta y actualiza el misterio de la Pascua de Cristo y, por ello, es el acontecimiento capaz de revelar el sentido de la Buena Nueva y de comunicar la vida misma de Dios. Con sus ritmos, sus lenguajes y sus ritos, forma parte integrante del propio camino de conversión y de preparación a los sacramentos.

No fueron estos temas, que a los católicos sabemos que son los más importantes, los que han producido la estupefacción del progresismo, sino los que tienen que ver con el orden temporal o, mejor dicho, con la claridad meridiana con la que se expresó sobre ellos, en una Francia que hace gala de su laicismo. El jesuita Spadaro habrá quedado patitieso cuando escuchaba los discursos pontificios porque en su cuenta de X había pronosticado que León XIV sólo haría referencia a esas cuestiones en Lourdes, frente a un público reducido y focalizado. Y se refería a cuestiones como las del aborto, eutanasia o educación religiosa. Y no fue así. Lo dijo en Lourdes, pero lo dijo también a Macron en el Eliseo y a los líderes europeos en Metz.

Afirmó al respecto:

Pero ninguna ley humana debe hacernos perder la certeza de su dignidad. Por el contrario, precisamente en nombre de esta dignidad inalienable de la persona humana debe rechazarse firmemente la tentación de quitar la vida con el pretexto de una falsa compasión. Es imposible considerar normal el hecho de poner fin a la vida. Lo que es legal no es necesariamente moral. ¡Ninguno tiene el derecho, nunca, basándose en algoritmos de laboratorio, de decidir sobre la vida de un embrión determinado o de una persona de la tercera edad determinada! ¡La medicina nunca podrá convertirse en sierva de la muerte programada!»

Y en términos similares se expresó en otra ocasión. Con respecto a la educación religiosa dijo a los obispos:

Los invito a mantenerse vigilantes para defender la libertad y los derechos de la Iglesia a evangelizar, a educar en la verdadera libertad y a practicar públicamente el culto, para que, de manera visible, se pueda ejercer la caridad en nombre de Jesucristo. Sin embargo, la enseñanza católica no puede, en modo alguno, renunciar a su proyecto educativo, un proyecto centrado en Cristo que tiene como objetivo el desarrollo integral de la persona humana en todas sus dimensiones: espiritual, cultural, intelectual, moral y social. Por lo tanto, a nadie debe sorprenderle que en cualquier centro católico se ofrezcan oportunidades para encontrarse con Jesucristo y escuchar su Palabra. Y mucho menos, ningún alumno debería verse marginado en su clase, por el hecho de creer en Jesús.

Sobre estas cuestiones espinosas que no evitó sino que afrontó con claridad, respondió en la conferencia de prensa que brindó a los periodistas en su viaje de regreso quienes le objetaron que se habría metido en política:

Puede que haya políticos, digamos, de izquierdas o de derechas, que sostengan que la religión debería limitarse únicamente a la esfera privada; dejemos que las personas hagan lo que quieran por su cuenta, pero como Estado debemos mantenernos al margen. En realidad, cuando fui a Francia, lo hice principalmente para predicar el Evangelio, para anunciar la Buena Nueva, para reafirmar lo que el propio Jesucristo dice cuando afirma: «Yo soy el camino, la verdad y la vida», es decir, para proclamar la verdad que Jesús nos ofrece. La defensa de la vida es un tema que, como todos sabéis, la Iglesia enseña y en el que cree profundamente. Y así, por un lado, sabía, obviamente, que en Francia se ha aprobado recientemente una ley [de eutanasia], mientras que en otros países europeos y en otras partes del mundo se están debatiendo cuestiones relacionadas con el final de la vida. […] Por lo tanto, diría que, si esto es política, la he hecho, pero no para entrometerme en la política francesa. Lo he hecho para enseñar aquello en lo que la Iglesia cree verdaderamente.

En Metz, reunidos con personalidades de la cultura y líderes europeos, el Papa León afirmó:

Para entender esta larga historia, sin embargo, no se puede omitir a otro padre de Europa: san Benito, que san Pablo VI proclamó patrono de Europa en 1964, llamándolo «mensajero de paz, realizador de unión, maestro de civilización». La ayuda a los pobres, a los enfermos y a los ancianos; la educación de los niños y las universidades; los hospitales y la medicina; la arquitectura y la ingeniería; el desarrollo de las ciencias; el derecho y la organización de las ciudades y de los propios estados: ¡tantos ámbitos, en Europa, han sido profundamente influenciados por san Benito y sus monjes! Sin este acervo monástico, la civilización europea, tal como la conocemos, no existiría. Aquí, en Metz, gracias a la obra, entre otras, de san Crodegango, se respiraba un espíritu benedictino de fraternidad, comunión y vida compartida. Desde aquí, el canto gregoriano se difundió en los territorios carolingios, trayendo armonía y belleza a todo el continente. No se puede hablar de Europa sin mencionar el cristianismo.

Y en ese mismo ámbito, dijo también:

A los jóvenes les digo: tengan el valor de vivir de manera responsable la misión de construir la paz, en su corazón, en sus relaciones, en su familia, en las escuelas y universidades, en la vida de sus ciudades, de sus pueblos y de toda Europa. No tengan miedo de formar una familia, de tener hijos, de defender la dignidad de cada persona, desde el primer instante en el vientre de la madre hasta su último aliento.

Finalmente, era previsible que el pontífice romano se refiriera a la dolorosa herida que las consagraciones episcopales de Êcone causaron a la Iglesia, pues es en Francia donde ese movimiento es más fuerte. Y lo hizo, como exhortación, en dos oportunidades. En una homilía

Antepongan, por tanto, la comunión con el Sucesor de Pedro y con la Iglesia a sus sensibilidades personales, para cultivar la unidad del pueblo de Dios.

Y en el discurso a los obispos:

Esta unidad no es una simple uniformidad, sino que permite que toda sensibilidad auténticamente católica converja de forma natural en una profesión de fe común, mediante la obediencia a los pastores legítimos y, en particular, al Sucesor de Pedro, «principio y fundamento, perpetuo y visible, de la unidad de fe y de comunión» (LG, 18). Se trata de una unidad dinámica que se nutre de la Tradición de la Iglesia —desde los Padres hasta el Concilio Vaticano II— y del Magisterio posconciliar.

Como dije, leí todas las alocuciones pronunciadas por el Santo Padre en su viaje a Francia. En ellas, como es lógico, aparecen también cosas intrascendentes y algunas otras—pocas— que no me gustaron mucho. Pero eso es lo normal y lo previsible. Lo que no me parece normal ni justo, aunque sí predecible, es que algunos maximalistas o insaciables, hayan comenzado a alertar, con tono condescendiente y admonitorio: «¡No se dejen engañar por los latines y las solemnidades!». Y señalaron como razón de esa alerta un único pasaje dicho en su primer día de viaje, en el que habla de los “ideales” de la Revolución Francesa. Allí no hay rectitud de intención ni honestidad: obliteran todos los discursos del Papa para atacarlo por un sólo párrafo, texto que, por lo demás, buscan interpretar del modo más torcido posible.

Dijo el Santo Padre:

Francia aportó al mundo auténticos logros; entre ellos, el reconocimiento de los “Derechos Humanos” inscritos en la naturaleza de la persona humana, en particular el de la libertad religiosa. Esta atención permanente a la dignidad inherente a toda persona humana encuentra eco en su lema nacional. La libertad, la igualdad y la fraternidad no son simples palabras grabadas en los frontones de sus edificios públicos, sino que remiten a exigencias éticas universales que encuentran también en el mensaje evangélico una fuente inagotable de inspiración y plenitud.

La gravedad de estas expresiones vendría dada, según ellos, en que se estaría fundamentando el lema revolucionario en el Evangelio. Pero no leen toda la frase. El Papa no dice que la libertad, la igualdad y la fraternidad se funden en el Evangelio, como si el Sermón de la Montaña hubiese sido un borrador de la Declaración de 1789. Dice más bien, que esos principios éticos encuentran también en el mensaje evangélico “una fuente inagotable de inspiración y plenitud”, y ancla los derechos en la naturaleza de la persona humana, no en la voluntad general ni en el contrato de Rousseau. La dirección del argumento es exactamente la inversa de la que le reprochan los maximalistas, puesto que no va de la Revolución al Evangelio, sino del Evangelio hacia unas palabras que, arrancadas de su suelo, andan huérfanas por los frontispicios de Francia. Es la vieja lógica de la gracia que no destruye la naturaleza sino que la perfecciona, y que perfecciona también, cuando puede, el lenguaje de los hombres.

Nada de esto es nuevo. San Pablo, en el Areópago, no empezó su predicación denunciando la idolatría de los atenienses y rompiendo altares, aunque le hervía el espíritu al ver la ciudad llena de ídolos; tomó en cambio la inscripción de uno de esos altares paganos, Agnṓstōi theṓi, «al dios desconocido», y les dijo: “Lo que veneráis sin conocer, eso os anuncio”. Y para mayor escándalo de los insaciables de entonces, citó a un poeta gentil, Arato de Solos: “Porque somos también de su linaje”. San Justino vio en la sabiduría de los griegos semillas dispersas del Logos; san Agustín mandó despojar a los egipcios de su oro para ponerlo al servicio de Cristo; y san Gregorio Magno escribió al abad Melito que no derribara los templos de los anglos, sino que los purificara con agua bendita y los consagrara al verdadero Dios, de modo que el pueblo, acudiendo a los lugares acostumbrados, aprendiera a adorar a quien no conocía. La Iglesia nunca creyó que para evangelizar hubiera que empezar por quemar el vocabulario del interlocutor, sino que prefirió siempre bautizarlo.

Y con más razón cuando el vocabulario es, en rigor, robado. Porque la tríada revolucionaria no salió de la nada: no hay fraternidad sin un Padre común, la igualdad de los hombres la proclamó san Pablo a los gálatas mucho antes que la Asamblea Nacional, y la libertad es aquella para la cual Cristo nos liberó. Chesterton lo vio con su agudeza habitual: el mundo moderno está lleno de viejas virtudes cristianas que se han vuelto locas, porque fueron separadas unas de otras y andan vagando solas. Devolverles el juicio no es claudicar ante la Revolución, sino que es reclamar lo que siempre fue nuestro. Y quien piense que un Papa no puede pronunciar esas palabras sin bendecir la guillotina debería explicar por qué San Pablo pudo citar a Arato sin incensar a Zeus.

Y termino con un interrogante y una profecía. ¿Cómo será la visita de León XIV a la Argentina? Los franceses -fuerza es decirlo-, superaron con creces a los españoles. Todo fue en la Galia de mejor calidad, desde las liturgias hasta la famosa vigilia con los jóvenes. Pero creo que nuestros hermanos españoles se deben tranquilizar: los argentinos, esta vez y a diferencia del fútbol, les ganaremos ampliamente en cutrerismo, vulgaridad y mal gusto. Es lo que me temo por algunos datos que van llegando. En la vigilia con los jóvenes, por ejemplo, cantará ¡Abel Pinto! Por suerte no se siguió la sugerencia de uno de los sacerdotes encargados de la organización, el P. Fabrizio Maranzana (busquen y sabrán quién es), que propuso que la conductora del encuentro fuera la modelo y mujer de enésimos maridos y amantes, Pampita Ardohain. ¿La reemplazará Flor de la V. o Lizi Tagliani?

Y mi profecía. El Santo Padre dirá unas cuantas verdades que no gustarán nada al gobierno, y es lo que corresponde. Pero dirá también unas cuantas verdades que no gustarán nada a los obispos viudos de Francisco que, como zombies, siguen vagando dañando y aterrorizando el suelo argentino.