Having quickly archived the cold and cerebral Joseph Ratzinger, Italian media and politicians, not to mention public opinion, have been enthusiastically hailing pope Francis, by most considered a “new” pope, herald of a different style of Church management, with his humble image and sensitivity to ordinary people. It must be said, he didn’t have to face such a tremendous challenge in gaining more popularity than his predecessor, but the press has already overwhelmed us with comments on his not-so-flashy cross, his modest gold-plated ring, his stripped-down papal seat, or the fact that he’s riding a bus with other ‘ordinary’ cardinals, and inviting fellow Argentineans to spend their money on charity rather than travelling to Rome. He even insisted on paying his own hotel bill, making everyone gawk in admiration: unfortunately, blinded by this make-up, most failed to notice for instance that the hotel was technically his property (an International House of Clergy in Scrofa Street in Rome), and that the hotel adamantly refused to take any money from him, according to La Repubblica.
We may sound like the usual nagging pain in the clergy’s neck, allergic to facile enthusiasm and idolatry, but we really can’t wait for this wave of pope frenzy to be over and for commentators to come back to their senses. We’ll just wait to judge him on his future stances on things like civil rights and the preservation of Church’s privileges, which charm and big smiles alone won’t suffice to dissimulate. We know, for instance, that Bergoglio’s background as the head of the Argentinean Episcopal Conference was one of strict conservatism and political intervention, just like his Italian counterpart, cardinal Bagnasco.
Meanwhile, although the newly elected Parliament is in theory less confessional than any previous one we’ve had, it seems that even freshermen are enraptured by this reverential climate. Laura Boldrini, the new Chaiwoman at the Chamber of Deputees, praised on Facebook the pope’s first sermon as one “capable of touching the heart of both believers and non believers”. One of her very first acts in office was to actually invite the pontiff to the Parliament. “I hope he will soon visit the Chamber of Deputees”, she said. “It will be a great honour to listen to his message in what we would like to be more and more ‘a house of good politics’”. Reactions to this line on Facebook seem to be mainly negative, given that inviting a pope to the Parliament is not the best sign of secularism and sounds at least inappropriate, especially when high expectations have been raised for a new institutional approach. We don’t see how the pontiff could be a role model for politics, on the other hand we know all too well the effects of political meddling of the Church in Italy, recently epitomised by Mario Monti’s ‘clerical-technical’ government.
At the Parliament’s inauguration, the provisional vice-president Antonio Leone invited the Chamber to applaud the Pope. Most complied and stood up, with the exception of several deputees of the Five Star Movement (M5S), including the candidate premier Roberto Fico. At the Senate, this feat raised the reprobation of Mr Roberto Formigoni, who denounced in a tweet:
“51 M5S senators out of 54 remained seated while the whole Senate stood up and warmly applauded Pope Francis. Catholics, be aware!”
— Roberto Formigoni (@r_formigoni) 15th March 2013
Small symbolic gestures, but worthy of being mentioned, especially when we’re seeing so many genuflections. However, the M5S – one of non-believers’ preferred parties, apparently unhampered by clerical influences – occasionally slips, too, when the pope’s concerned. In a post on Beppe Grillo’s blog, Pope Francis is warmly praised for his “low-cost” style and the reference in his name to “God’s pauper”, “the environmentalist and animalist saint”. The M5S itself chose the 4th of October 2009 as its symbolic founding date, a day dedicated to the saint from Assisi. A sober post-scriptum adds: “We rejoice at his name, hopefully we’ll soon rejoice at his work, too”.
The strongest parties in today’s Parliament have campaigned on the base of secular promises: potentially there is now sufficient endorsement to implement secular reforms and grant civil rights claimed by a widening base of Italian society. Perhaps they reckon that it will be easier for them to keep such promises if the Pope gives his approval. Although we understand the hopes of many seduced by the ‘humble’ pope, at the moment we don’t see sufficient ground to believe that this kind of blissful change is about to come: this would in fact require a radical change in the Catholic doctrine. We’d be delighted to be proven wrong. By facts, not by symbolic gestures.