In a new interview for Argentine daily La Nación, Pope Francis settles some quite determined rumours. We’ve heard some already, from either the Holy Father or various level-headed commentators. I want to highlight a few, which I think shed a new or valuable light on matters.
Pope Francis offers some criticism of how some people write, speak or think about him.
“In general people don´t read about what is going on. Somebody did say to me once, “Of course, of course. Insight is so good for us but we need clearer things”. And I answered, “Look, I wrote an encyclical, true enough, it was a big job, and an Apostolic Exhortation, I´m permanently making statements, giving homilies; that´s teaching. That´s what I think, not what the media say that I think. Check it out, it´s very clear. Evangelii Gaudium is very clear”.
I’ve said it about Pope Francis’ predecessor, but it is equally true (if sometimes a bit more difficult) of Pope Francis: want to know what the Pope said? Read the Pope, not the media.
About the reassignment of Cardinal Raymond Burke, considered by many to be the result of some disagreement with the Pope:
“One day Cardinal Burke asked me what he would be doing as he had still not been confirmed in his position, in the legal sector, but rather had been confirmed “donec alitur provideatur“. And I answered “Give me some time because we are thinking of a legal restructuring of the G9”. I told him nothing had been done about it yet and that it was being considered. After that the issue of the Order of Malta cropped up and we needed a smart American who would know how to get around and I thought of him for that position. I suggested this to him long before the synod. I said to him “This will take place after the synod because I want you to participate in the synod as Dicastery Head”. As the chaplain of Malta he wouldn´t have been able to be present. He thanked me in very good terms and accepted my offer, I even think he liked it. Because he is a man that gets around a lot, he does a lot of travelling and would surely be busy there. It is therefore not true that I removed him because of how he had behaved in the synod.”
And lastly, about Colonel Anrig, the commander of the Swiss Guard, who was recently dismissed:
“Last year, two months after my election, [Colonel Anrig’s] five year term expired. Then I told the Secretary of State – Pietro Parolin wasn’t there yet – that I could neither appoint him or dismiss him, because I didn’t know the man. So I decided to extend his mandate with the typical formula “donec alitur provideatur“, “until provided otherwise.” It seemed unfair to make a decision at that time, one way or the other. Then I learnt more about all that, I visited the barracks, I spent an afternoon with the Swiss Guards, I also stayed for dinner one evening, I got to know the people and I felt a renovation would be healthy. It was a mere renewal, because his term was over and it is healthy to know that nobody is eternal. So I talked to him and we agreed that he was leaving by the end of the year. He knew that since July.
It is a change, a normal change. He is an excellent person, a very good Catholic, a family man.
He is a good Christian, a believer, a very good man, I have an excellent relationship with him, so I talked with him face to face and said: “Look, I prefer a renewal”. There was is nothing unusual in it. There’s no fault in him, no blame.”
Rumours and gossip are appealing, because they present events that are more interesting and exciting, or suit our own understanding and wishes better. They are not, however, by definition, true, as these explanations by Pope Francis show. He is, after all, one who should know better than any of us what really happened.