19.9.13

A Big Heart Open to God





A Big Heart Open to God




exclusive interview with Pope Francis

Editor’s Note: This interview with Pope Francis took place over the course of three meetings during August 2013 in Rome. The interview was conducted in person by Antonio Spadaro, S.J., editor in chief of La Civiltà Cattolica, the Italian Jesuit journal. Father Spadaro conducted the interview on behalf of La Civiltà Cattolica, America and several other major Jesuit journals around the world. The editorial teams at each of the journals prepared questions and sent them to Father Spadaro, who then consolidated and organized them. The interview was conducted in Italian. After the Italian text was officially approved, America commissioned a team of five independent experts to translate it into English.



Pope Francis


Father Spadaro met the pope at the Vatican in the pope’s apartments in the Casa Santa Marta, where he has chosen to live since his election. Father Spadaro begins his account of the interview with a description of the pope’s living quarters.
The setting is simple, austere. The workspace occupied by the desk is small. I am impressed not only by the simplicity of the furniture, but also by the objects in the room. There are only a few. These include an icon of St. Francis, a statue of Our Lady of Luján, patron saint of Argentina, a crucifix and a statue of St. Joseph sleeping. The spirituality of Jorge Mario Bergoglio is not made of “harmonized energies,” as he would call them, but of human faces: Christ, St. Francis, St. Joseph and Mary.
The pope speaks of his trip to Brazil. He considers it a true grace, that World Youth Day was for him a “mystery.” He says that he is not used to talking to so many people: “I can look at individual persons, one at a time, to come into contact in a personal way with the person I have before me. I am not used to the masses,” the pope remarks. He also speaks about the moment during the conclave when he began to realize that he might be elected pope. At lunch on Wednesday, March 13, he felt a deep and inexplicable inner peace and comfort come over him, he said, along with a great darkness. And those feelings accompanied him until his election later that day.
The pope had spoken earlier about his great difficulty in giving interviews. He said that he prefers to think rather than provide answers on the spot in interviews. In this interview the pope interrupted what he was saying in response to a question several times, in order to add something to an earlier response. Talking with Pope Francis is a kind of volcanic flow of ideas that are bound up with each other. Even taking notes gives me an uncomfortable feeling, as if I were trying to suppress a surging spring of dialogue.

Who Is Jorge Mario Bergoglio?

I ask Pope Francis point-blank: “Who is Jorge Mario Bergoglio?” He stares at me in silence. I ask him if I may ask him this question. He nods and replies: “I ​​do not know what might be the most fitting description.... I am a sinner. This is the most accurate definition. It is not a figure of speech, a literary genre. I am a sinner.”
The pope continues to reflect and concentrate, as if he did not expect this question, as if he were forced to reflect further. “Yes, perhaps I can say that I am a bit astute, that I can adapt to circumstances, but it is also true that I am a bit naïve. Yes, but the best summary, the one that comes more from the inside and I feel most true is this: I am a sinner whom the Lord has looked upon.” And he repeats: “I ​​am one who is looked upon by the Lord. I always felt my motto, Miserando atque Eligendo [By Having Mercy and by Choosing Him], was very true for me.”
The motto is taken from the Homilies of Bede the Venerable, who writes in his comments on the Gospel story of the calling of Matthew: “Jesus saw a publican, and since he looked at him with feelings of love and chose him, he said to him, ‘Follow me.’” The pope adds: “I think the Latin gerund miserando is impossible to translate in both Italian and Spanish. I like to translate it with another gerund that does not exist: misericordiando [“mercy-ing”].
Pope Francis continues his reflection and says, jumping to another topic: “I do not know Rome well. I know a few things. These include the Basilica of St. Mary Major; I always used to go there. I know St. Mary Major, St. Peter’s...but when I had to come to Rome, I always stayed in [the neighborhood of] Via della Scrofa. From there I often visited the Church of St. Louis of France, and I went there to contemplate the painting of ‘The Calling of St. Matthew,’ by Caravaggio.
“That finger of Jesus, pointing at Matthew. That’s me. I feel like him. Like Matthew.” Here the pope becomes determined, as if he had finally found the image he was looking for: “It is the gesture of Matthew that strikes me: he holds on to his money as if to say, ‘No, not me! No, this money is mine.’ Here, this is me, a sinner on whom the Lord has turned his gaze. And this is what I said when they asked me if I would accept my election as pontiff.” Then the pope whispers in Latin: “I am a sinner, but I trust in the infinite mercy and patience of our Lord Jesus Christ, and I accept in a spirit of penance.”

Why Did You Become a Jesuit?

I continue: “Holy Father, what made ​​you choose to enter the Society of Jesus? What struck you about the Jesuit order?”
“I wanted something more. But I did not know what. I entered the diocesan seminary. I liked the Dominicans and I had Dominican friends. But then I chose the Society of Jesus, which I knew well because the seminary was entrusted to the Jesuits. Three things in particular struck me about the Society: the missionary spirit, community and discipline. And this is strange, because I am a really, really undisciplined person. But their discipline, the way they manage their time—these things struck me so much.
“And then a thing that is really important for me: community. I was always looking for a community. I did not see myself as a priest on my own. I need a community. And you can tell this by the fact that I am here in Santa Marta. At the time of the conclave I lived in Room 207. (The rooms were assigned by drawing lots.) This room where we are now was a guest room. I chose to live here, in Room 201, because when I took possession of the papal apartment, inside myself I distinctly heard a ‘no.’ The papal apartment in the Apostolic Palace is not luxurious. It is old, tastefully decorated and large, but not luxurious. But in the end it is like an inverted funnel. It is big and spacious, but the entrance is really tight. People can come only in dribs and drabs, and I cannot live without people. I need to live my life with others.”

What Does It Mean for a Jesuit to Be Bishop of Rome?

I ask Pope Francis about the fact that he is the first Jesuit to be elected bishop of Rome: “How do you understand the role of service to the universal church that you have been called to play in the light of Ignatian spirituality? What does it mean for a Jesuit to be elected pope? What element of Ignatian spirituality helps you live your ministry?”
[3]“Discernment,” he replies. “Discernment is one of the things that worked inside St. Ignatius. For him it is an instrument of struggle in order to know the Lord and follow him more closely. I was always struck by a saying that describes the vision of Ignatius: non coerceri a maximo, sed contineri a minimo divinum est (“not to be limited by the greatest and yet to be contained in the tiniest—this is the divine”). I thought a lot about this phrase in connection with the issue of different roles in the government of the church, about becoming the superior of somebody else: it is important not to be restricted by a larger space, and it is important to be able to stay in restricted spaces. This virtue of the large and small is magnanimity. Thanks to magnanimity, we can always look at the horizon from the position where we are. That means being able to do the little things of every day with a big heart open to God and to others. That means being able to appreciate the small things inside large horizons, those of the kingdom of God.
“This motto,” the pope continues, “offers parameters to assume a correct position for discernment, in order to hear the things of God from God’s ‘point of view.’ According to St. Ignatius, great principles must be embodied in the circumstances of place, time and people. In his own way, John XXIII adopted this attitude with regard to the government of the church, when he repeated the motto, ‘See everything; turn a blind eye to much; correct a little.’ John XXIII saw all things, the maximum dimension, but he chose to correct a few, the minimum dimension. You can have large projects and implement them by means of a few of the smallest things. Or you can use weak means that are more effective than strong ones, as Paul also said in his First Letter to the Corinthians.
“This discernment takes time. For example, many think that changes and reforms can take place in a short time. I believe that we always need time to lay the foundations for real, effective change. And this is the time of discernment. Sometimes discernment instead urges us to do precisely what you had at first thought you would do later. And that is what has happened to me in recent months. Discernment is always done in the presence of the Lord, looking at the signs, listening to the things that happen, the feeling of the people, especially the poor. My choices, including those related to the day-to-day aspects of life, like the use of a modest car, are related to a spiritual discernment that responds to a need that arises from looking at things, at people and from reading the signs of the times. Discernment in the Lord guides me in my way of governing.
“But I am always wary of decisions made hastily. I am always wary of the first decision, that is, the first thing that comes to my mind if I have to make a decision. This is usually the wrong thing. I have to wait and assess, looking deep into myself, taking the necessary time. The wisdom of discernment redeems the necessary ambiguity of life and helps us find the most appropriate means, which do not always coincide with what looks great and strong.”

The Society of Jesus

Discernment is therefore a pillar of the spirituality of Pope Francis. It expresses in a particular manner his Jesuit identity. I ask him then how the Society of Jesus can be of service to the church today, what are its characteristics, but also the possible challenges facing the Society of Jesus.
“The Society of Jesus is an institution in tension,” the pope replied, “always fundamentally in tension. A Jesuit is a person who is not centered in himself. The Society itself also looks to a center outside itself; its center is Christ and his church. So if the Society centers itself in Christ and the church, it has two fundamental points of reference for its balance and for being able to live on the margins, on the frontier. If it looks too much in upon itself, it puts itself at the center as a very solid, very well ‘armed’ structure, but then it runs the risk of feeling safe and self-sufficient. The Society must always have before itself the Deus semper maior, the always-greater God, and the pursuit of the ever greater glory of God, the church as true bride of Christ our Lord, Christ the king who conquers us and to whom we offer our whole person and all our hard work, even if we are clay pots, inadequate. This tension takes us out of ourselves continuously. The tool that makes the Society of Jesus not centered in itself, really strong, is, then, the account of conscience, which is at the same time paternal and fraternal, because it helps the Society to fulfill its mission better.”
The pope is referring to the requirement in the Constitutions of the Society of Jesus that the Jesuit must “manifest his conscience,” that is, his inner spiritual situation, so that the superior can be more conscious and knowledgeable about sending a person on mission.
“But it is difficult to speak of the Society,” continues Pope Francis. “When you express too much, you run the risk of being misunderstood. The Society of Jesus can be described only in narrative form. Only in narrative form do you discern, not in a philosophical or theological explanation, which allows you rather to discuss. The style of the Society is not shaped by discussion, but by discernment, which of course presupposes discussion as part of the process. The mystical dimension of discernment never defines its edges and does not complete the thought. The Jesuit must be a person whose thought is incomplete, in the sense of open-ended thinking. There have been periods in the Society in which Jesuits have lived in an environment of closed and rigid thought, more instructive-ascetic than mystical: this distortion of Jesuit life gave birth to the Epitome Instituti.”
The pope is referring to a compendium, made for practical purposes, that came to be seen as a replacement for the Constitutions. The formation of Jesuits for some time was shaped by this text, to the extent that some never read the Constitutions, the foundational text. During this period, in the pope’s view, the rules threatened to overwhelm the spirit, and the Society yielded to the temptation to explicate and define its charism too narrowly.
Pope Francis continues: “No, the Jesuit always thinks, again and again, looking at the horizon toward which he must go, with Christ at the center. This is his real strength. And that pushes the Society to be searching, creative and generous. So now, more than ever, the Society of Jesus must be contemplative in action, must live a profound closeness to the whole church as both the ‘people of God’ and ‘holy mother the hierarchical church.’ This requires much humility, sacrifice and courage, especially when you are misunderstood or you are the subject of misunderstandings and slanders, but that is the most fruitful attitude. Let us think of the tensions of the past history, in the previous centuries, about the Chinese rites controversy, the Malabar rites and the Reductions in Paraguay.
“I am a witness myself to the misunderstandings and problems that the Society has recently experienced. Among those there were tough times, especially when it came to the issue of extending to all Jesuits the fourth vow of obedience to the pope. What gave me confidence at the time of Father Arrupe [superior general of the Jesuits from 1965 to 1983] was the fact that he was a man of prayer, a man who spent much time in prayer. I remember him when he prayed sitting on the ground in the Japanese style. For this he had the right attitude and made the right decisions.”

The Model: Peter Faber, ‘Reformed Priest’

I am wondering if there are figures among the Jesuits, from the origins of the Society to the present date, that have affected him in a particular way, so I ask the pope who they are and why. He begins by mentioning Ignatius Loyola [founder of the Jesuits] and Francis Xavier, but then focuses on a figure who is not as well known to the general public: Peter Faber (1506-46), from Savoy. He was one of the first companions of St. Ignatius, in fact the first, with whom he shared a room when the two were students at the University of Paris. The third roommate was Francis Xavier. Pius IX declared Faber blessed on Sept. 5, 1872, and the cause for his canonization is still open.
The pope cites an edition of Faber’s works, which he asked two Jesuit scholars, Miguel A. Fiorito and Jaime H. Amadeo, to edit and publish when he was provincial superior of the Jesuits in Argentina. An edition that he particularly likes is the one by Michel de Certeau. I ask the pope why he is so impressed by Faber.
“[His] dialogue with all,” the pope says, “even the most remote and even with his opponents; his simple piety, a certain naïveté perhaps, his being available straightaway, his careful interior discernment, the fact that he was a man capable of great and strong decisions but also capable of being so gentle and loving.”
Michel de Certeau characterized Faber simply as “the reformed priest,” for whom interior experience, dogmatic expression and structural reform are inseparable. The pope then continues with a reflection on the true face of the founder of the Society.
“Ignatius is a mystic, not an ascetic,” he says. “It irritates me when I hear that the Spiritual Exercises are ‘Ignatian’ only because they are done in silence. In fact, the Exercises can be perfectly Ignatian also in daily life and without the silence. An interpretation of the Spiritual Exercises that emphasizes asceticism, silence and penance is a distorted one that became widespread even in the Society, especially in the Society of Jesus in Spain. I am rather close to the mystical movement, that of Louis Lallement and Jean-Joseph Surin. And Faber was a mystic.”

Experience in Church Government

What kind of experience in church government, as a Jesuit superior and then as superior of a province of the Society of Jesus, helped to fully form Father Bergoglio? The style of governance of the Society of Jesus involves decisions made by the superior, but also extensive consultation with his official advisors. So I ask: “Do you think that your past government experience can serve you in governing the universal church?” After a brief pause for reflection, he responds:
“In my experience as superior in the Society, to be honest, I have not always behaved in that way—that is, I did not always do the necessary consultation. And this was not a good thing. My style of government as a Jesuit at the beginning had many faults. That was a difficult time for the Society: an entire generation of Jesuits had disappeared. Because of this I found myself provincial when I was still very young. I was only 36 years old. That was crazy. I had to deal with difficult situations, and I made my decisions abruptly and by myself. Yes, but I must add one thing: when I entrust something to someone, I totally trust that person. He or she must make a really big mistake before I rebuke that person. But despite this, eventually people get tired of authoritarianism.
“My authoritarian and quick manner of making decisions led me to have serious problems and to be accused of being ultraconservative. I lived a time of great interior crisis when I was in Cordova. To be sure, I have never been like Blessed Imelda [a goody-goody], but I have never been a right-winger. It was my authoritarian way of making decisions that created problems.
“I say these things from life experience and because I want to make clear what the dangers are. Over time I learned many things. The Lord has allowed this growth in knowledge of government through my faults and my sins. So as Archbishop of Buenos Aires, I had a meeting with the six auxiliary bishops every two weeks, and several times a year with the council of priests. They asked questions and we opened the floor for discussion. This greatly helped me to make the best decisions. But now I hear some people tell me: ‘Do not consult too much, and decide by yourself.’ Instead, I believe that consultation is very important.
“The consistories [of cardinals], the synods [of bishops] are, for example, important places to make real and active this consultation. We must, however, give them a less rigid form. I do not want token consultations, but real consultations. The consultation group of eight cardinals, this ‘outsider’ advisory group, is not only my decision, but it is the result of the will of the cardinals, as it was expressed in the general congregations before the conclave. And I want to see that this is a real, not ceremonial consultation.”

Thinking With the Church

I ask Pope Francis what it means exactly for him to “think with the church,” a notion St. Ignatius writes about in the Spiritual Exercises. He replies using an image.
“The image of the church I like is that of the holy, faithful people of God. This is the definition I often use, and then there is that image from the Second Vatican Council’s ‘Dogmatic Constitution on the Church’ (No. 12). Belonging to a people has a strong theological value. In the history of salvation, God has saved a people. There is no full identity without belonging to a people. No one is saved alone, as an isolated individual, but God attracts us looking at the complex web of relationships that take place in the human community. God enters into this dynamic, this participation in the web of human relationships.
“The people itself constitutes a subject. And the church is the people of God on the journey through history, with joys and sorrows. Thinking with the church, therefore, is my way of being a part of this people. And all the faithful, considered as a whole, are infallible in matters of belief, and the people display this infallibilitas in credendo, this infallibility in believing, through a supernatural sense of the faith of all the people walking together. This is what I understand today as the ‘thinking with the church’ of which St. Ignatius speaks. When the dialogue among the people and the bishops and the pope goes down this road and is genuine, then it is assisted by the Holy Spirit. So this thinking with the church does not concern theologians only.
“This is how it is with Mary: If you want to know who she is, you ask theologians; if you want to know how to love her, you have to ask the people. In turn, Mary loved Jesus with the heart of the people, as we read in the Magnificat. We should not even think, therefore, that ‘thinking with the church’ means only thinking with the hierarchy of the church.”
After a brief pause, Pope Francis emphasizes the following point, in order to avoid misunderstandings: “And, of course, we must be very careful not to think that this infallibilitas of all the faithful I am talking about in the light of Vatican II is a form of populism. No; it is the experience of ‘holy mother the hierarchical church,’ as St. Ignatius called it, the church as the people of God, pastors and people together. The church is the totality of God’s people.
“I see the sanctity of God’s people, this daily sanctity,” the pope continues. “There is a ‘holy middle class,’ which we can all be part of, the holiness Malègue wrote about.” The pope is referring to Joseph Malègue, a French writer (1876–1940), particularly to the unfinished trilogy Black Stones: The Middle Classes of Salvation.
“I see the holiness,” the pope continues, “in the patience of the people of God: a woman who is raising children, a man who works to bring home the bread, the sick, the elderly priests who have so many wounds but have a smile on their faces because they served the Lord, the sisters who work hard and live a hidden sanctity. This is for me the common sanctity. I often associate sanctity with patience: not only patience as hypomoné [the New Testament Greek word], taking charge of the events and circumstances of life, but also as a constancy in going forward, day by day. This is the sanctity of the militant church also mentioned by St. Ignatius. This was the sanctity of my parents: my dad, my mom, my grandmother Rosa who loved ​​me so much. In my breviary I have the last will of my grandmother Rosa, and I read it often. For me it is like a prayer. She is a saint who has suffered so much, also spiritually, and yet always went forward with courage.
“This church with which we should be thinking is the home of all, not a small chapel that can hold only a small group of selected people. We must not reduce the bosom of the universal church to a nest protecting our mediocrity. And the church is Mother; the church is fruitful. It must be. You see, when I perceive negative behavior in ministers of the church or in consecrated men or women, the first thing that comes to mind is: ‘Here’s an unfruitful bachelor’ or ‘Here’s a spinster.’ They are neither fathers nor mothers, in the sense that they have not been able to give spiritual life. Instead, for example, when I read the life of the Salesian missionaries who went to Patagonia, I read a story of the fullness of life, of fruitfulness.
“Another example from recent days that I saw got the attention of newspapers: the phone call I made to a young man who wrote me a letter. I called him because that letter was so beautiful, so simple. For me this was an act of generativity. I realized that he was a young man who is growing, that he saw in me a father, and that the letter tells something of his life to that father. The father cannot say, ‘I do not care.’ This type of fruitfulness is so good for me.”

Young Churches and Ancient Churches

Remaining with the subject of the church, I ask the pope a question in light of the recent World Youth Day. This great event has turned the spotlight on young people, but also on those “spiritual lungs” that are the Catholic churches founded in historically recent times. “What,” I ask, “are your hopes for the universal church that come from these churches?”
The pope replies: “The young Catholic churches, as they grow, develop a synthesis of faith, culture and life, and so it is a synthesis different from the one developed by the ancient churches. For me, the relationship between the ancient Catholic churches and the young ones is similar to the relationship between young and elderly people in a society. They build the future, the young ones with their strength and the others with their wisdom. You always run some risks, of course. The younger churches are likely to feel self-sufficient; the ancient ones are likely to want to impose on the younger churches their cultural models. But we build the future together.”

The Church as Field Hospital

Pope Benedict XVI, in announcing his resignation, said that the contemporary world is subject to rapid change and is grappling with issues of great importance for the life of faith. Dealing with these issues requires strength of body and soul, Pope Benedict said. I ask Pope Francis: “What does the church need most at this historic moment? Do we need reforms? What are your wishes for the church in the coming years? What kind of church do you dream of?”
Pope Francis begins by showing great affection and immense respect for his predecessor: “Pope Benedict has done an act of holiness, greatness, humility. He is a man of God.
“I see clearly,” the pope continues, “that the thing the church needs most today is the ability to heal wounds and to warm the hearts of the faithful; it needs nearness, proximity. I see the church as a field hospital after battle. It is useless to ask a seriously injured person if he has high cholesterol and about the level of his blood sugars! You have to heal his wounds. Then we can talk about everything else. Heal the wounds, heal the wounds.... And you have to start from the ground up.
“The church sometimes has locked itself up in small things, in small-minded rules. The most important thing is the first proclamation: Jesus Christ has saved you. And the ministers of the church must be ministers of mercy above all. The confessor, for example, is always in danger of being either too much of a rigorist or too lax. Neither is merciful, because neither of them really takes responsibility for the person. The rigorist washes his hands so that he leaves it to the commandment. The loose minister washes his hands by simply saying, ‘This is not a sin’ or something like that. In pastoral ministry we must accompany people, and we must heal their wounds.
“How are we treating the people of God? I dream of a church that is a mother and shepherdess. The church’s ministers must be merciful, take responsibility for the people and accompany them like the good Samaritan, who washes, cleans and raises up his neighbor. This is pure Gospel. God is greater than sin. The structural and organizational reforms are secondary—that is, they come afterward. The first reform must be the attitude. The ministers of the Gospel must be people who can warm the hearts of the people, who walk through the dark night with them, who know how to dialogue and to descend themselves into their people’s night, into the darkness, but without getting lost. The people of God want pastors, not clergy acting like bureaucrats or government officials. The bishops, particularly, must be able to support the movements of God among their people with patience, so that no one is left behind. But they must also be able to accompany the flock that has a flair for finding new paths.
“Instead of being just a church that welcomes and receives by keeping the doors open, let us try also to be a church that finds new roads, that is able to step outside itself and go to those who do not attend Mass, to those who have quit or are indifferent. The ones who quit sometimes do it for reasons that, if properly understood and assessed, can lead to a return. But that takes audacity and courage.”
I mention to Pope Francis that there are Christians who live in situations that are irregular for the church or in complex situations that represent open wounds. I mention the divorced and remarried, same-sex couples and other difficult situations. What kind of pastoral work can we do in these cases? What kinds of tools can we use?
“We need to proclaim the Gospel on every street corner,” the pope says, “preaching the good news of the kingdom and healing, even with our preaching, every kind of disease and wound. In Buenos Aires I used to receive letters from homosexual persons who are ‘socially wounded’ because they tell me that they feel like the church has always condemned them. But the church does not want to do this. During the return flight from Rio de Janeiro I said that if a homosexual person is of good will and is in search of God, I am no one to judge. By saying this, I said what the catechism says. Religion has the right to express its opinion in the service of the people, but God in creation has set us free: it is not possible to interfere spiritually in the life of a person.
“A person once asked me, in a provocative manner, if I approved of homosexuality. I replied with another question: ‘Tell me: when God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person?’ We must always consider the person. Here we enter into the mystery of the human being. In life, God accompanies persons, and we must accompany them, starting from their situation. It is necessary to accompany them with mercy. When that happens, the Holy Spirit inspires the priest to say the right thing.
“This is also the great benefit of confession as a sacrament: evaluating case by case and discerning what is the best thing to do for a person who seeks God and grace. The confessional is not a torture chamber, but the place in which the Lord’s mercy motivates us to do better. I also consider the situation of a woman with a failed marriage in her past and who also had an abortion. Then this woman remarries, and she is now happy and has five children. That abortion in her past weighs heavily on her conscience and she sincerely regrets it. She would like to move forward in her Christian life. What is the confessor to do?
“We cannot insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage and the use of contraceptive methods. This is not possible. I have not spoken much about these things, and I was reprimanded for that. But when we speak about these issues, we have to talk about them in a context. The teaching of the church, for that matter, is clear and I am a son of the church, but it is not necessary to talk about these issues all the time.
“The dogmatic and moral teachings of the church are not all equivalent. The church’s pastoral ministry cannot be obsessed with the transmission of a disjointed multitude of doctrines to be imposed insistently. Proclamation in a missionary style focuses on the essentials, on the necessary things: this is also what fascinates and attracts more, what makes the heart burn, as it did for the disciples at Emmaus. We have to find a new balance; otherwise even the moral edifice of the church is likely to fall like a house of cards, losing the freshness and fragrance of the Gospel. The proposal of the Gospel must be more simple, profound, radiant. It is from this proposition that the moral consequences then flow.
“I say this also thinking about the preaching and content of our preaching. A beautiful homily, a genuine sermon must begin with the first proclamation, with the proclamation of salvation. There is nothing more solid, deep and sure than this proclamation. Then you have to do catechesis. Then you can draw even a moral consequence. But the proclamation of the saving love of God comes before moral and religious imperatives. Today sometimes it seems that the opposite order is prevailing. The homily is the touchstone to measure the pastor’s proximity and ability to meet his people, because those who preach must recognize the heart of their community and must be able to see where the desire for God is lively and ardent. The message of the Gospel, therefore, is not to be reduced to some aspects that, although relevant, on their own do not show the heart of the message of Jesus Christ.”

A Religious Order Pope

Pope Francis is the first pontiff from a religious order since the Camaldolese monk Gregory XVI, who was elected in 1831. I ask: “What is the specific place of religious men and women in the church of today?”
“Religious men and women are prophets,” says the pope. “They are those who have chosen a following of Jesus that imitates his life in obedience to the Father, poverty, community life and chastity. In this sense, the vows cannot end up being caricatures; otherwise, for example, community life becomes hell, and chastity becomes a way of life for unfruitful bachelors. The vow of chastity must be a vow of fruitfulness. In the church, the religious are called to be prophets in particular by demonstrating how Jesus lived on this earth, and to proclaim how the kingdom of God will be in its perfection. A religious must never give up prophecy. This does not mean opposing the hierarchical part of the church, although the prophetic function and the hierarchical structure do not coincide. I am talking about a proposal that is always positive, but it should not cause timidity. Let us think about what so many great saints, monks and religious men and women have done, from St. Anthony the Abbot onward. Being prophets may sometimes imply making waves. I do not know how to put it.... Prophecy makes noise, uproar, some say ‘a mess.’ But in reality, the charism of religious people is like yeast: prophecy announces the spirit of the Gospel.”

The Roman Curia

I ask the pope what he thinks of the dicasteries of the Roman Curia, the various departments that assist the pope in his mission.
“The dicasteries of the Roman Curia are at the service of the pope and the bishops,” he says. “They must help both the particular churches and the bishops’ conferences. They are instruments of help. In some cases, however, when they are not functioning well, they run the risk of becoming institutions of censorship. It is amazing to see the denunciations for lack of orthodoxy that come to Rome. I think the cases should be investigated by the local bishops’ conferences, which can get valuable assistance from Rome. These cases, in fact, are much better dealt with locally. The Roman congregations are mediators; they are not middlemen or managers.”
On June 29, during the ceremony of the blessing and imposition of the pallium on 34 metropolitan archbishops, Pope Francis spoke about “the path of collegiality” as the road that can lead the church to “grow in harmony with the service of primacy.” So I ask: “How can we reconcile in harmony Petrine primacy and collegiality? Which roads are feasible also from an ecumenical perspective?”
The pope responds, “We must walk together: the people, the bishops and the pope. Synodality should be lived at various levels. Maybe it is time to change the methods of the Synod of Bishops, because it seems to me that the current method is not dynamic. This will also have ecumenical value, especially with our Orthodox brethren. From them we can learn more about the meaning of episcopal collegiality and the tradition of synodality. The joint effort of reflection, looking at how the church was governed in the early centuries, before the breakup between East and West, will bear fruit in due time. In ecumenical relations it is important not only to know each other better, but also to recognize what the Spirit has sown in the other as a gift for us. I want to continue the discussion that was begun in 2007 by the joint [Catholic–Orthodox] commission on how to exercise the Petrine primacy, which led to the signing of the Ravenna Document. We must continue on this path.”
I ask how Pope Francis envisions the future unity of the church in light of this response. He answers: “We must walk united with our differences: there is no other way to become one. This is the way of Jesus.”

Women in the Life of the Church

And what about the role of women in the church? The pope has made ​​reference to this issue on several occasions. He took up the matter during the return trip from Rio de Janeiro, claiming that the church still lacks a profound theology of women. I ask: “What should be the role of women in the church? How do we make their role more visible today?”
He answers: “I am wary of a solution that can be reduced to a kind of ‘female machismo,’ because a woman has a different make-up than a man. But what I hear about the role of women is often inspired by an ideology of machismo. Women are asking deep questions that must be addressed. The church cannot be herself without the woman and her role. The woman is essential for the church. Mary, a woman, is more important than the bishops. I say this because we must not confuse the function with the dignity. We must therefore investigate further the role of women in the church. We have to work harder to develop a profound theology of the woman. Only by making this step will it be possible to better reflect on their function within the church. The feminine genius is needed wherever we make important decisions. The challenge today is this: to think about the specific place of women also in those places where the authority of the church is exercised for various areas of the church.”

The Second Vatican Council

“What did ​​the Second Vatican Council accomplish?” I ask.
“Vatican II was a re-reading of the Gospel in light of contemporary culture,” says the pope. “Vatican II produced a renewal movement that simply comes from the same Gospel. Its fruits are enormous. Just recall the liturgy. The work of liturgical reform has been a service to the people as a re-reading of the Gospel from a concrete historical situation. Yes, there are hermeneutics of continuity and discontinuity, but one thing is clear: the dynamic of reading the Gospel, actualizing its message for today—which was typical of Vatican II—is absolutely irreversible. Then there are particular issues, like the liturgy according to the Vetus Ordo. I think the decision of Pope Benedict [his decision of July 7, 2007, to allow a wider use of the Tridentine Mass] was prudent and motivated by the desire to help people who have this sensitivity. What is worrying, though, is the risk of the ideologization of the Vetus Ordo, its exploitation.”

To Seek and Find God in All Things

At the World Youth Day in Rio de Janeiro, Pope Francis repeatedly declared: “God is real. He manifests himself today. God is everywhere.” These are phrases that echo the Ignatian expression “to seek and find God in all things.” So I ask the pope: “How do you seek and find God in all things?”
“What I said in Rio referred to the time in which we seek God,” he answers. “In fact, there is a temptation to seek God in the past or in a possible future. God is certainly in the past because we can see the footprints. And God is also in the future as a promise. But the ‘concrete’ God, so to speak, is today. For this reason, complaining never helps us find God. The complaints of today about how ‘barbaric’ the world is—these complaints sometimes end up giving birth within the church to desires to establish order in the sense of pure conservation, as a defense. No: God is to be encountered in the world of today.
“God manifests himself in historical revelation, in history. Time initiates processes, and space crystallizes them. God is in history, in the processes.
“We must not focus on occupying the spaces where power is exercised, but rather on starting long-run historical processes. We must initiate processes rather than occupy spaces. God manifests himself in time and is present in the processes of history. This gives priority to actions that give birth to new historical dynamics. And it requires patience, waiting.
“Finding God in all things is not an ‘empirical eureka.’ When we desire to encounter God, we would like to verify him immediately by an empirical method. But you cannot meet God this way. God is found in the gentle breeze perceived by Elijah. The senses that find God are the ones St. Ignatius called spiritual senses. Ignatius asks us to open our spiritual sensitivity to encounter God beyond a purely empirical approach. A contemplative attitude is necessary: it is the feeling that you are moving along the good path of understanding and affection toward things and situations. Profound peace, spiritual consolation, love of God and love of all things in God—this is the sign that you are on this right path.”

Certitude and Mistakes

I ask, “So if the encounter with God is not an ‘empirical eureka,’ and if it is a journey that sees with the eyes of history, then we can also make mistakes?”
The pope replies: “Yes, in this quest to seek and find God in all things there is still an area of uncertainty. There must be. If a person says that he met God with total certainty and is not touched by a margin of uncertainty, then this is not good. For me, this is an important key. If one has the answers to all the questions—that is the proof that God is not with him. It means that he is a false prophet using religion for himself. The great leaders of the people of God, like Moses, have always left room for doubt. You must leave room for the Lord, not for our certainties; we must be humble. Uncertainty is in every true discernment that is open to finding confirmation in spiritual consolation.
“The risk in seeking and finding God in all things, then, is the willingness to explain too much, to say with human certainty and arrogance: ‘God is here.’ We will find only a god that fits our measure. The correct attitude is that of St. Augustine: seek God to find him, and find God to keep searching for God forever. Often we seek as if we were blind, as one often reads in the Bible. And this is the experience of the great fathers of the faith, who are our models. We have to re-read the Letter to the Hebrews, Chapter 11. Abraham leaves his home without knowing where he was going, by faith. All of our ancestors in the faith died seeing the good that was promised, but from a distance.... Our life is not given to us like an opera libretto, in which all is written down; but it means going, walking, doing, searching, seeing.... We must enter into the adventure of the quest for meeting God; we must let God search and encounter us.
“Because God is first; God is always first and makes the first move. God is a bit like the almond flower of your Sicily, Antonio, which always blooms first. We read it in the Prophets. God is encountered walking, along the path. At this juncture, someone might say that this is relativism. Is it relativism? Yes, if it is misunderstood as a kind of indistinct pantheism. It is not relativism if it is understood in the biblical sense, that God is always a surprise, so you never know where and how you will find him. You are not setting the time and place of the encounter with him. You must, therefore, discern the encounter. Discernment is essential.
“If the Christian is a restorationist, a legalist, if he wants everything clear and safe, then he will find nothing. Tradition and memory of the past must help us to have the courage to open up new areas to God. Those who today always look for disciplinarian solutions, those who long for an exaggerated doctrinal ‘security,’ those who stubbornly try to recover a past that no longer exists­—they have a static and inward-directed view of things. In this way, faith becomes an ideology among other ideologies. I have a dogmatic certainty: God is in every person’s life. God is in everyone’s life. Even if the life of a person has been a disaster, even if it is destroyed by vices, drugs or anything else—God is in this person’s life. You can, you must try to seek God in every human life. Although the life of a person is a land full of thorns and weeds, there is always a space in which the good seed can grow. You have to trust God.”

Must We Be Optimistic?

The pope’s words remind me of some of his past reflections, in which as a cardinal he wrote that God is already living in the city, in the midst of all and united to each. It is another way, in my opinion, to say what St. Ignatius wrote in the Spiritual Exercises, that God “labors and works” in our world. So I ask: “Do we have to be optimistic? What are the signs of hope in today’s world? How can I be optimistic in a world in crisis?”
“I do not like to use the word optimism because that is about a psychological attitude,” the pope says. “I like to use the word hope instead, according to what we read in the Letter to the Hebrews, Chapter 11, that I mentioned before. The fathers of the faith kept walking, facing difficulties. And hope does not disappoint, as we read in the Letter to the Romans. Think instead of the first riddle of Puccini’s opera ‘Turandot,’” the pope suggests.
At that moment I recalled more or less by heart the verses of the riddle of the princess in that opera, to which the solution is hope: “In the gloomy night flies an iridescent ghost./ It rises and opens its wings/ on the infinite black humanity./ The whole world invokes it/ and the whole world implores it./ But the ghost disappears with the dawn/ to be reborn in the heart./ And every night it is born/ and every day it dies!”
“See,” says Pope Francis, “Christian hope is not a ghost and it does not deceive. It is a theological virtue and therefore, ultimately, a gift from God that cannot be reduced to optimism, which is only human. God does not mislead hope; God cannot deny himself. God is all promise.”

Art and Creativity

I am struck by the reference the pope just made to Puccini’s “Turandot” while speaking of the mystery of hope. I would like to understand better his artistic and literary references. I remind him that in 2006 he said that great artists know how to present the tragic and painful realities of life with beauty. So I ask who are the artists and writers he prefers, and if they have something in common.
“I have really loved a diverse array of authors. I love very much Dostoevsky and Hölderlin. I remember Hölderlin for that poem written for the birthday of his grandmother that is very beautiful and was spiritually very enriching for me. The poem ends with the verse, ‘May the man hold fast to what the child has promised.’ I was also impressed because I loved my grandmother Rosa, and in that poem Hölderlin compares his grandmother to the Virgin Mary, who gave birth to Jesus, the friend of the earth who did not consider anybody a foreigner.
“I have read The Betrothed, by Alessandro Manzoni, three times, and I have it now on my table because I want to read it again. Manzoni gave me so much. When I was a child, my grandmother taught me by heart the beginning of The Betrothed: ‘That branch of Lake Como that turns off to the south between two unbroken chains of mountains....’ I also liked Gerard Manley Hopkins very much.
“Among the great painters, I admire Caravaggio; his paintings speak to me. But also Chagall, with his ‘White Crucifixion.’ Among musicians I love Mozart, of course. The ‘Et incarnatus est’ from his Mass in C minor is matchless; it lifts you to God! I love Mozart performed by Clara Haskil. Mozart fulfills me. But I cannot think about his music; I have to listen to it. I like listening to Beethoven, but in a Promethean way, and the most Promethean interpreter for me is Furtwängler. And then Bach’s Passions. The piece by Bach that I love so much is the ‘Erbarme Dich,’ the tears of Peter in the ‘St. Matthew Passion.’ Sublime. Then, at a different level, not intimate in the same way, I love Wagner. I like to listen to him, but not all the time. The performance of Wagner’s ‘Ring’ by Furtwängler at La Scala in Milan in 1950 is for me the best. But also the ‘Parsifal’ by Knappertsbusch in 1962.
“We should also talk about the cinema. ‘La Strada,’ by Fellini, is the movie that perhaps I loved the most. I identify with this movie, in which there is an implicit reference to St. Francis. I also believe that I watched all of the Italian movies with Anna Magnani and Aldo Fabrizi when I was between 10 and 12 years old. Another film that I loved is ‘Rome, Open City.’ I owe my film culture especially to my parents who used to take us to the movies quite often.
“Anyway, in general I love tragic artists, especially classical ones. There is a nice definition that Cervantes puts on the lips of the bachelor Carrasco to praise the story of Don Quixote: ‘Children have it in their hands, young people read it, adults understand it, the elderly praise it.’ For me this can be a good definition of the classics.”
I ask the pope about teaching literature to his secondary school students.
“It was a bit risky,” he answers. “I had to make sure that my students read El Cid. But the boys did not like it. They wanted to read Garcia Lorca. Then I decided that they would study El Cid at home and that in class I would teach the authors the boys liked the most. Of course, young people wanted to read more ‘racy’ literary works, like the contemporary La Casada Infiel or classics like La Celestina, by Fernando de Rojas. But by reading these things they acquired a taste in literature, poetry, and we went on to other authors. And that was for me a great experience. I completed the program, but in an unstructured way—that is, not ordered according to what we expected in the beginning, but in an order that came naturally by reading these authors. And this mode befitted me: I did not like to have a rigid schedule, but rather I liked to know where we had to go with the readings, with a rough sense of where we were headed. Then I also started to get them to write. In the end I decided to send Borges two stories written by my boys. I knew his secretary, who had been my piano teacher. And Borges liked those stories very much. And then he set out to write the introduction to a collection of these writings.”
“Then, Holy Father, creativity is important for the life of a person?” I ask. He laughs and replies: “For a Jesuit it is extremely important! A Jesuit must be creative.”

Frontiers and Laboratories

During a visit by the fathers and staff of La Civiltà Cattolica, the pope had spoken about the importance of the triad “dialogue, discernment, frontier.” And he insisted particularly on the last point, citing Paul VI and what he had said in a famous speech about the Jesuits: “Wherever in the church—even in the most difficult and extreme fields, in the crossroads of ideologies, in the social trenches—there has been and is now conversation between the deepest desires of human beings and the perennial message of the Gospel, Jesuits have been and are there.” I ask Pope Francis what should be the priorities of journals published by the Society of Jesus.
“The three key words that I commended to La Civiltà Cattolica can be extended to all the journals of the Society, perhaps with different emphases according to their natures and their objectives. When I insist on the frontier, I am referring in a particular way to the need for those who work in the world of culture to be inserted into the context in which they operate and on which they reflect. There is always the lurking danger of living in a laboratory. Ours is not a ‘lab faith,’ but a ‘journey faith,’ a historical faith. God has revealed himself as history, not as a compendium of abstract truths. I am afraid of laboratories because in the laboratory you take the problems and then you bring them home to tame them, to paint them, out of their context. You cannot bring home the frontier, but you have to live on the border and be audacious.”
I ask for examples from his personal experience.
“When it comes to social issues, it is one thing to have a meeting to study the problem of drugs in a slum neighborhood and quite another thing to go there, live there and understand the problem from the inside and study it. There is a brilliant letter by Father Arrupe to the Centers for Social Research and Action on poverty, in which he says clearly that one cannot speak of poverty if one does not experience poverty, with a direct connection to the places in which there is poverty. The word insertion is dangerous because some religious have taken it as a fad, and disasters have occurred because of a lack of discernment. But it is truly important.”
“The frontiers are many. Let us think of the religious sisters living in hospitals. They live on the frontier. I am alive because of one of them. When I went through my lung disease at the hospital, the doctor gave me penicillin and streptomycin in certain doses. The sister who was on duty tripled my doses because she was daringly astute; she knew what to do because she was with ill people all day. The doctor, who really was a good one, lived in his laboratory; the sister lived on the frontier and was in dialogue with it every day. Domesticating the frontier means just talking from a remote location, locking yourself up in a laboratory. Laboratories are useful, but reflection for us must always start from experience.”

Human Self-Understanding

I ask Pope Francis about the enormous changes occurring in society and the way human beings are reinterpreting themselves. At this point he gets up and goes to get the breviary from his desk. It is in Latin, now worn from use. He opens to the Office of Readings for Friday of the 27th Week in Ordinary Time and reads me a passage from the Commonitorium Primum of St. Vincent of Lerins: “Even the dogma of the Christian religion must follow these laws, consolidating over the years, developing over time, deepening with age.”
The pope comments: “St. Vincent of Lerins makes a comparison between the biological development of man and the transmission from one era to another of the deposit of faith, which grows and is strengthened with time. Here, human self-understanding changes with time and so also human consciousness deepens. Let us think of when slavery was accepted or the death penalty was allowed without any problem. So we grow in the understanding of the truth. Exegetes and theologians help the church to mature in her own judgment. Even the other sciences and their development help the church in its growth in understanding. There are ecclesiastical rules and precepts that were once effective, but now they have lost value or meaning. The view of the church’s teaching as a monolith to defend without nuance or different understandings is wrong.
“After all, in every age of history, humans try to understand and express themselves better. So human beings in time change the way they perceive themselves. It’s one thing for a man who expresses himself by carving the ‘Winged Victory of Samothrace,’ yet another for Caravaggio, Chagall and yet another still for Dalí. Even the forms for expressing truth can be multiform, and this is indeed necessary for the transmission of the Gospel in its timeless meaning.
“Humans are in search of themselves, and, of course, in this search they can also make mistakes. The church has experienced times of brilliance, like that of Thomas Aquinas. But the church has lived also times of decline in its ability to think. For example, we must not confuse the genius of Thomas Aquinas with the age of decadent Thomist commentaries. Unfortunately, I studied philosophy from textbooks that came from decadent or largely bankrupt Thomism. In thinking of the human being, therefore, the church should strive for genius and not for decadence.
“When does a formulation of thought cease to be valid? When it loses sight of the human or even when it is afraid of the human or deluded about itself. The deceived thought can be depicted as Ulysses encountering the song of the Siren, or as Tannhäuser in an orgy surrounded by satyrs and bacchantes, or as Parsifal, in the second act of Wagner’s opera, in the palace of Klingsor. The thinking of the church must recover genius and better understand how human beings understand themselves today, in order to develop and deepen the church’s teaching.”

Prayer

I ask Pope Francis about his preferred way to pray.
“I pray the breviary every morning. I like to pray with the psalms. Then, later, I celebrate Mass. I pray the Rosary. What I really prefer is adoration in the evening, even when I get distracted and think of other things, or even fall asleep praying. In the evening then, between seven and eight o’clock, I stay in front of the Blessed Sacrament for an hour in adoration. But I pray mentally even when I am waiting at the dentist or at other times of the day.
“Prayer for me is always a prayer full of memory, of recollection, even the memory of my own history or what the Lord has done in his church or in a particular parish. For me it is the memory of which St. Ignatius speaks in the First Week of the Exercises in the encounter with the merciful Christ crucified. And I ask myself: ‘What have I done for Christ? What am I doing for Christ? What should I do for Christ?’ It is the memory of which Ignatius speaks in the ‘Contemplation for Experiencing Divine Love,’ when he asks us to recall the gifts we have received. But above all, I also know that the Lord remembers me. I can forget about him, but I know that he never, ever forgets me. Memory has a fundamental role for the heart of a Jesuit: memory of grace, the memory mentioned in Deuteronomy, the memory of God’s works that are the basis of the covenant between God and the people. It is this memory that makes me his son and that makes me a father, too.”








___________________________+_________________________

Laura Brooklyn
I am not a Catholic, but I am a Christian. To be completely honest, I have not felt proud to even call myself a Christian lately because of the hateful ignorance that has tarnished our faith. I worry I will be misunderstood.
Pope Francis has truly opened my eyes and made me proud to be associated with a faith of compassion, simplicity, and humanity. When I read last week that he was phone calling distraught parishioners who had written to him I was curious. He actually called a woman who is pregnant out of wedlock and is being pressured by her married boyfriend to have an abortion. The Pope called to offer his support and to personally baptize this child when born. Not to shun her for misbehavior.
These are acts of kindness, and I see the Pope as a man who is living life by the example of Jesus. We seem to have strayed from what Jesus sought to teach us: to be kind, loving, accepting of others and to live a life of service.
Thank you Pope Francis for your "radical" ideas which are not new at all, just lucid and human.


mc Nashville, TN
As a former Catholic who became disgusted with the church's insane focus on sex, while poverty and injustice and financial crime (i.e., theft) thrived, I am relieved to see that Pope Francis appears to be a voice of sanity.

I hope he lives long and his influence prevails. There are many Catholics who are more like Francis than Benedict--but in the last 30 years only the strident hateful voices of the rightwingers in the Church have been given the megaphone.

It's probably too late for me--but maybe my children will find they can stand to attend such a church.




MIcah NY
We have a new, young, flashy priest in our parish who speaks very well after having spent 5 years in Rome under the last pope -- in 2 recent sermons he posed the question: what is the central defining characteristic of a christian catholic? his answer both times was something about fidelity to dogma, causing me to head slap audibly (the 2nd time). Our pope is making clear to all who missed the lesson in Sunday school and seminary: the central, unique, onlyest, singular, wonderful, mystical, fantasmogorical definitional characteristic of a catholic christian is LOVE. Love is how they will know us; salvation not condemnation; spirit of the law (love), rather than letter of the law, rendering unto god what is god's and to Obama what is Obama's; and never, but never, casting the first stone. I can say that I have waited my whole life for a pope like this and I shall savor every moment of his papacy. Francis says we lost the fragrance of the gospel -- well it's springtime in the church and I can smell the flowers again.



Zander1948 upstate ny
He is MY Pope! I have been waiting for words like these from the Vatican. Now I am waiting for actions to match. I can only pray that some crazy anti-abortion person does not try to do something drastic to stop him. It sounds as if he is more like "the nuns on the bus," who have been admonished for not making stopping abortion their top priority. Instead, their top priorities have been working (and living among) the poor, stopping human trafficking, improving education in high-poverty areas, and living simply themselves. Habemus Papa!




Curt Montgomery, Ala.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is authentic leadership. I'm a conservative Catholic and even I, staunchly pro-life, am delighted to read, "The proclamation of the saving love of God comes before moral and religious imperatives.” There is a shepherd in Rome and his name is Francis.



MF Piermont, NY
Looks like the Catholic Church has stumbled accidentally on its own Gorbachev. (And I sure hope the Pope has a good bodyguard because he is going to have to watch his back.)

I am relishing the image of the heartburn he must be giving the archconservative right wing that elected him.




mikeyz albany, ca
As a proud, card-carrying atheist, I have to say I am very impressed with this pope. He seems like the first pope with humanity and common sense in many a year.



Matthew Carnicelli Brooklyn, New York

It's a miracle. Somehow, despite both John Paul II and Benedict's best efforts, an authentic free thinker slipped through the cracks.

My only advice would be to make sure that he has a dedicated food taster checking his food in advance.

We wouldn't want the scenario immortalized in Godfather III re-enacted once again...





11.7.13

the disposition and incentives to support wars to retain political and professional credibility

The International Relations Academy and the Beltway “Foreign Policy Community”—Why the Disconnect?



Glenn Greenwald uncovers a very interesting sentence in Les Gelb’s Democracy essay [.pdf] on the Iraq war and the media:
gelb
Leslie Gelb:  My initial support for the war was symptomatic of unfortunate tendencies within the foreign policy community, namely the disposition and incentives to support wars to retain political and professional credibility.

I had to read that two or three times to unpack all that’s going on in there.  The question obviously being begged is where does the disposition, and where do the incentives “to support wars to retain political and professional credibility” come from?
Consider: There are two groups of people, the Foreign Policy Community (FPC) in Washington and New York, centered around the national-security bureaucracy and think tanks that produce orthodox foreign policy hands like Brookings, AEI, and CFR.  There is a second group of people, international relations academics.  The two groups have, in most cases, similar training (PhDs from top schools) and in the course of obtaining such training have been exposed to many of the same theories and topics.
Yet the two groups have been wildly at variance in terms of their views on important public policy issues.  Take the Iraq war, for example.  As anyone who was in Washington at the time knows, the FPC was extremely fond of the idea of invading Iraq.  To oppose it was to marginalize oneself for years.  Indeed, those who promoted the disastrous adventure have prospered, while those who (bravely or stupidly, depending on your point of view) opposed it remain huddled in the chilly, dusty alcoves of popular debate.
In the academy, meanwhile, there was hardly any debate over Iraq–almost 80 percent of IR academics opposed the war. [.pdf] To the extent academics did enter the public debate on the issue, it was to pay for an advertisement in the New York Times warning against the war. [.pdf] The only academics who spoke out in favor of the war (to my knowledge, anyway) were IR liberals like Anne-Marie Slaughter, who sought policy positions in Washington.  (Slaughter, of course, was rewarded with a spot as Director of Policy Planning at the State Department, while to my knowledge none of the academic opponents of the war have gained Washington policy jobs.)
So what is going on here?  Why is there such a profound disconnect between the two groups that look so similar on paper?  The first, most obvious answer is that the academy tends to be more liberal (in the domestic political sense), so academics tend to have more peacenik-y views.  The problem with that argument is that the domestic-political liberals in the FPC supported the war just as strongly as their conservative brethren, which means that domestic political views don’t work as a determinant of support for war.
My sense is that the giant national-security bureaucracy in Washington that has emerged over the last 65 years has shaped incentives in a manner such that it is next-to-impossible to “get ahead” by advocating for restraint.  Put differently, restraint isn’t in anybody’s interest except the country’s, and there’s nobody in Washington representing broad national interests as opposed to their own parochial ones.  Every neoconservative or liberal imperialist in DC has someone’s interests behind them.  The Don Quixotes like myself and my colleagues here, by contrast, want to cut the defense budget, slow the opportunities for rent-seeking among contractors, etc, etc, etc.  As Wall Street Journal editorial page editorPaul Gigot once derisively referred to us, we’re just “four or five people in a phone booth.”  But we were right about Iraq, which is more than Gigot can say for himself.
For the legions of IR journal editors who are reading this post, I am completing an article draft examining this idea in more detail.  But for now you can cast an eye on a Steve Walt blog post that makes an argument very similar to my own:
…America’s role in the world today is shaped by two imbalances of power, not just one. The first is the gap between U.S. capabilities and everyone else’s, a situation that has some desirable features (especially for us) but one that also encourages the United States to do too much and allows others to do either too little or too many of the wrong things. The second imbalance is between organized interests whose core mission is constantly pushing the U.S. government to do more and in more places, and the far-weaker groups who think we might be better off showing a bit more restraint.
I’m open to different theories on this matter, but I think we should agree that at the very least, it’s an interesting puzzle.

Maureen Dowd gives a taste of sour grapes (part II)

multum non multa: Maureen Dowd gives a taste of sour grapes; Her readers know betterComparatives inventories of American perspectives on few things French

Maureen doesn't quit, even after the flood of readers' comments pointing to her distorted view of things French. As if to put such cries to rest, she veers into a bit of tabloidism, not without the nonchalance that grows in you when you get to expense your trip to France under the guise of journalism. A few quotes, miles away from their context, from a politician and voilà!, we have some aura of objectivity. Or do we? Here we have her 2nd installment:





dowd 3
Agent Saboteur?

PARIS — I am sitting across from Arnaud Montebourg, a free-market villain and romantic hero, the pol selected by Frenchwomen in a new French Elle magazine poll as a top candidate for having “a vacation love affair.”

The tall, elegant Montebourg, dressed in a black suit and black tie and flanked by black leather couches and two BlackBerrys, sits in a chic office above the Seine, charged with the quixotic task of reviving French industry.

He famously sent sales of Breton sailor tops surging when he posed in one to promote his “Made in France” campaign. The 50-year-old bachelor’s love life has been avidly chronicled, including the night he and his former girlfriend, the attractive black TV journalist Audrey Pulvar, were attacked by racist thugs.

Montebourg became the Socialist kingmaker after a surprisingly strong result in the 2011 presidential primary on an anti-globalization platform against Ségolène Royal, a former boss, and her former partner, François Hollande.

“I failed the first time, but it doesn’t mean I’ll fail the second,” he said about the presidency, speaking in a mix of French and British-accented English.

The Economist called him “the Enfant Terrible” for fencing with foreign capitalists with such ferocity that he almost got sacked. His apache dances with moguls are at odds with the government’s “Say Oui to France” campaign designed to lure foreign investment and stop France from dissolving into Greece.

Montebourg’s defenders say he represents the French tradition of dirigisme, wanting a king, desiring direction from the top, even though the government now, as part of the European Union, has fewer tools. His matador boldness, contrasted with Hollande’s blandness, plus his anti-corruption crusades and suspicion of the market economy — he even suggested temporary nationalization — have made him a champion to those who want a Charles de Gaulle de gauche.

Some of his irritated colleagues at the Finance Ministry at Bercy refer to the Minister for Industrial Renewal as “the madman on the third floor.” It’s hard to fathom how he can be for deglobalization and foreign investment at the same time. But as he looks for unrealistic solutions to problems that may be insoluble, many “Les Misérables” here admire him for keeping his dukes up, which keeps their hopes up. A bit of an outsider himself — he did not get into the top political school, his grandfather was a wealthy Algerian and he calls the Algerian war and colonization unresolved — he relishes sticking it to the bourgeoisie.

As a young lawyer, he helped defend Christian Didier, the killer of René Bousquet, the Vichy chief of police who went above and beyond Nazi instructions to send Jews, including thousands of children, to death camps. In 1995, he nearly forced then-Prime Minister Alain Juppé out of office over the legality of his apartment. In 2001, he petitioned to impeach President Jacques Chirac, under investigation for financial malfeasance. In 2011, he demanded that the louche Dominique Strauss-Kahn apologize to Socialists.

He got into a sizzling row with the American tire titan Morry “The Grizz” Taylor after Taylor said he would not rescue a French factory because French workers are “lazy, overpaid and talk too much.” Montebourg dismisses that as “nonsense,” and told me that “in Germany, one works less than in France, this needs to be known,” providing booklets to back it up. But, given conflicting French statistics, he may be living up to the sobriquet he awards himself: “professor of optimism.”

The French have to learn that if employers can’t fire someone for not working, they’ll never hire anyone. It’s hard to believe that the country that gave us a musical based on Victor Hugo’s revolutionaries really needs the government to guard against the latest Disney remake of a bikini beach movie. But Montebourg defends the French threat to blow up the European-U.S. economic talks because they want to keep barriers to U.S. movies and television. Then he concludes, charmingly, “We love American movies.”

I ask him about another contentious move: blocking Yahoo’s Marissa Mayer from buying a controlling stake in DailyMotion, the French version of YouTube, which was denounced in a Times editorial as protectionism “grounded in meaningless nationalism.”

“I didn’t say no to Yahoo,” he insists. “I said let’s make it 50/50. Let’s go together and not let the big eat the small.” He told Yahoo it was not in such great shape and had “made several companies disappear.”
Arnaud Montebourg
And to think Jean-Baptiste Colbert, Louis XIV’s finance minister, asked businessmen how the government could help. “Laissez-nous faire,” one replied, giving birth to the term.

“I agree with Romain Gary, who said that nationalism is to hate others, patriotism is to be proud of ourselves,” Montebourg says. Asked about the French malaise, he says: “The problem comes from us. We doubt ourselves too much.”

He says he trusts President Obama to “clean up the mess” on N.S.A. snooping. “I blame Facebook, Google and all the Internet giants who agreed to spy on us,” he said, “so Europe is going to be tougher on these companies.”

French business leaders are howling about Hollande’s wishy-washy economic policies. And Nicolas Sarkozy, once excoriated by Montebourg as “a spoiled brat who uses France as a toy that does not belong to him,” is dropping a handkerchief.

Can Sarko make a comeback?

“Maybe,” Montebourg replies roguishly. “Maybe in handcuffs.”






Joseph Huben upstate NY
This column has evoked a reflexive derision of the French. A reflex patently congruent with the propaganda of the far right in this country. By these standards, what American would want to pay 10% more in taxes for universal university education, health care, and an affordable wage? What American does not want the unemployed to suffer so they do not stop looking for a job or take a substandard job that pays less? Have we become a nation of somnambulants who resent the higher standard of living afforded our French allies because we envy our rich masters? and hate those with lesser means? and march in step to detest food stamp recipients: children, the elderly, and the disabled, the primary recipients of this "European" socialist program? Perhaps, because the French or Germans or the British do not recoil in horror at the mention of socialism we consider them depraved. Americans believe, without evidence or thought, that socialism is a bankrupt disincentive to innovation, growth and prosperity.
As time passes, we all come to recognize that the cause of the financial collapse, and the stupid crippling austerity programs are thinly veiled corporate subversions that punished nations and then hobbled people with debt and a lower standard of living in the name of their entitled right to profit by any means. Governments can be corrupted but as the number of people exploited grow governments fall.
The French are not done as long as the French people take to the streets.




John McBrideSeattle, WA
My father's mother was a Caron; her ancestors were sent to "the new world," aka, Canada, from Breton in the early 18th century. I've always had a predeliction for France, especially after cementing the affection with a 3 month stay there in 1990, and several returns since.

Still, Maureen, your column exhibits a certain, ... a certain.... je ne sais quoi.

Monsieur Montebourg is, probably, charming to you in "a vacation love affair” sense; but there is nothing you reveal about him that leads me to conclude he's France's next Napoleon.

if the French select him, fine, but based on what I've learned, my pragmatism leads me to be wary and to suspect that DeGaulle, for his many faults, would likely suit France better, raised up from his grave.




art seaman Kittanning, PA
There is always this idea the Ms. Dowd knows something we do not. She is so in tune with the a vante-garde that we do not know. It is tiresome. I give up. What is she talking about?
Who are these people, and who cares?




Mike Roddy Yucca Valley, California

I like this man, especially when he talks about nationalization. That's what we need to do with our own out of control oil companies.

Montebourg is also correct about establishing limits on American cultural intrusions. The French realize that our television programs, especially the ones on cable (Real Housewives of New Jersey, anyone?) will make you dumber, and cause some of us to crack up.

We need someone like him over here, since our top pols are all preselected by the corporations, and self censor even in their dreams. The French will be fine.




Liam Jumper South Carolina

Marcel Pagnol, the late but critically important French film producer and author, placed emphasis on content of an image. He didn't use it only as a tool to tell a story.

This is an apt metaphor for France versus the corporatist West. France tries to be a national culture that values the human experience. The corporatist West does not. They see humans as mere tools. This is the problem in our democracy. Our democracy was supposed to be a government where people could find a balance between profit-focused economics and the human experience. At the moment, we're be corralled into being tools - tools where a third of our children live in poverty, tools where amassing obscene fortunes is celebrated while a third of the population cannot afford healthcare, tools who are intentionally priced out of quality education.

Montebourg's 50/50 split is to preserve the French identity while being part of the mainstream. This isn't new. The French have long worked to protect French language from morphing into English with a French accent.

Of course Montebourg wants ability to reject American film and TV trash.

A few years ago a fellow at my favorite Wisconsin coffee shop was extolling French fries being re-named Freedom Fries. I told him I agreed and we should immediately march up to the high school and demand they rename the French class Freedom class.

Freedom is a mix of economics that serves the people with a strong dose of valuing the quality of human experience ahead of tools.




charles san francisco
“I blame Facebook, Google and all the Internet giants who agreed to spy on us..."

Whatever the merits of the other points made here, this one is on the mark. We get outraged over government spying, but it was enabled, indeed made inevitable, when we allowed those companies to pursue business models based entirely on spying on their customers. We can only pray the Europeans do indeed stick to their guns on privacy--someone has to!



Kenneth Bergman Ashland, OR
Monsieur Montebourg's spirit is admirable, and so is his willingness to tell international corporations that France doesn't want to be taken over by them. He seems to recognize that international corporate largess always comes with strings attached, and that the corporate mindset these days is exploitive, not constructive. Unless they are controlled in some way, these corporations move into a country, privatize their profits while socializing the costs, then move on at their whim after having saddled the country with burdensome debt. (Here, I'm including financial institutions as well as outfits that actually make or mine something.) That's already happened in South America and in some of the smaller European nations like Portugal, Spain, and Ireland (Greece is a special case). Now, these corporate exploiters are moving on to richer countries where they hope to get a bigger bang for the buck.

So I'm glad to know that Montegourg is offering some resistance to corporate greed. There's not many nations that are willing to do that in these times.



Pat Choate Washington, Va.
Montebourg is making national industrial policy -- the approach to economics that has worked so well for Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, and most of all China.

Would he consider becoming an American and participating in our paralyzed political system?



Rob DL Connecticut
The French Revolution changed the world. What France needs now is some of that pride and spirit to break away from the fundamentally flawed and ill-conceived European Union.

It is ironic that the country most instrumental in making the European Union a reality, also seems to be the country suffering most from it's existence.

French culture is in a stranglehold, and the biggest single culprit is the common currency -- a currency that has become symbolic of their plight. France, and the rest of Europe, thought that ratifying the Lisbon Treaty would enable them, once again, to act with one voice on the world stage, but instead it's drowned that voice out and turned it into a political sideshow where you can be guaranteed a bureaucratic debacle (or a summit!) every other month.

The European Union was, among other things, an attempt by France and Europe to augment and consolidate their power, but instead it has diminished them to resemble a pathetic soap opera with Paris garnering one of the leading roles.

The French people got it right when they rejected the EU constitution in 2005, shocking the rest of Europe in the process. They'd be wise to try find more of that spirit of rebellion today; their future and culture literally depends on it!


Paul Nevada
"It's tough to be French", hey it's tough to be a US Citizen. I even have health care and a root canal/crown is going to be close to $2000. Ten years ago the combo might have been $800 or so with insurance. The little guy continues to get squeezed. Bourgeoisie businesses like doctors keep entrance out with a combination of licensing and the colleges do the rest with gouging tuition. I say let the flood gates open and issue a visa to anyone from any county with a medical license. Since we bluster so much about "free markets" let the medical profession squeal a little when the wages drop due to competition from foreign labor. Now what was this article about? Oh year, it's tough to be American, I mean French. It is all about perspective: plutocrats see it one way, we see it the other.




Doug Broome Vancouver
Quel audace! The nerve, the chutzpah!
The U.S. has completely surrendered to parasitic plutocrats who create nothing but financial destruction with their funny money games. American workers have entirely relinquished the proceeds of their doubling of productivity to the one per cent.
And Montebourg rejects the robber baron model.
He thinks workers should share in productivity increases! He says "Non!" to vulture capitalists.

He doesn't understand that globalization means inevitable misery for workers and endless trillions for fiancial parasites. It reminds one of de Gaulle telling Monaco he would cut off their electricity and water if they did not immediately reveal the specifics of tax evasion by rich French based in Monaco. He completely failed to appreciate how tax evasion by billionaires helps the cheated country.

Maureen, I don't know how to give you the news of dirigisme. You see, the elite of the French elite goes to a sort of super-college called the Ecole Nationale d'Administration. The French completely fail to understand how robber barons represent the national interest. Au contraire, they think that people trained in public policy have a better conception of the national good than, say, a CEO of Goldman Sachs whose interest is narrow and greed-focussed.
And they will intervene in the market when the market harms the country! They expect the rich to pay! They say non to suspect deals.
Guess what? French workers have done much better than American workers!


Doug Terry Maryland, DC Metro area
What has long been amazing to me is that anything gets done in Europe. In Paris, in particular, long lunches with lots of flowing wine are almost required. When an American company went over to France to help produce a French version of a crime drama, they were shocked to find that the whole crew, actors, camera people, everyone, expected to break down and stop for a two hour lunch. They were accustomed to working straight through and hoping they'd be done before midnight

Europeans generally get a lot of vacation time, about double what American's take. As vacation rolls around, whatever work the person had been doing is dropped. Too bad. It can wait.

A few years ago, I turned on French television in my hotel room. There were urgent bulletins being broadcast about who might leave at what time. For a few minutes I thought Paris was being evacuated because of a terrorist threat. Only after watching for awhile did I put 2+2 together: It was August and the bulletins were for the vacation evacuation. Parisians with different numbered license plates were being told when they could join the mad rush to the beach and mountains. Soon, the town would be empty. For the whole month.

Yet, work does happen. Sometimes. Look at the stunningly beautiful Millau bridge in southern France if you don't believe the French are still capable of great accomplishments. It is just that work isn't allowed to interfere with one's personal life so much as it does here.



gma Telluride, Colorado
Meanwhile Airbus is selling tons and tons of airliners. It is nearly August Maureen. Follow the crowds and leave Paris. Lots of stuff going on elsewhere, esp. in Toulouse.



Jacques Tati in Cannes


7.7.13

Maureen Dowd gives a taste of sour grapes; Her readers know better
Comparatives inventories of American perspectives on few things French

Sour Grapes


PARIS — VERSAILLES lived again at haute couture week, as designers paraded their let-them-eat-cake creations, hand-stitched with gilt embroidery and trimmed with guiltless fur — frousfrous that no real women can wear and few can afford.

On Friday night, Christian Lacroix offered his homage to Elsa Schiaparelli, but even high fashion couldn’t lift Paris from its low mood. “Liberté, égalité, morosité,” Le Monde declared.

Joie de vivre has given way to gaze de navel. The French are so busy wallowing in their existential estrangement — a state of mind Camus described as “Should I kill myself, or have a cup of coffee?” — that they don’t even have the energy to be rude. And now that they’re smoking electronic cigarettes, their ennui doesn’t look as cool. It’s not that they’ve lost faith in their own superiority. They’ve lost faith that the rest of the world sees it. The whole country has, as Catherine Deneuve says of her crazy blue moods, une araignée au plafond — a spider on the ceiling.

On Place Vendome, Christian Lacroix was dispatching models in black crepe chiffon peplum basques — whatever they are — while on Avenue Hoche, Lacroix’s dentist was bemoaning the black crepe City of Lights. Holding a cigarette in a waiting room filled with Picasso-print pillows, Dr. Gérard Armandou told how his patients, always prone to pessimism, are even more filled with malheur now as they sit in his chair contemplating tous les problèmes, including “not going anymore on holiday to Egypt.”

“Cocteau said the French are Italians in a bad mood, but now there is more morosity,” he said. “We are connecting with nostalgia. What is nostalgia? Where the present doesn’t agree with the hope that you got in the past.”

He said there are widening chasms between sectors of French society — old and young, natives and immigrants, “smokers and nonsmokers, homosexuals and non-homosexuals.”

“Enter conflict, where before there was none,” he said. “The French people, maybe they think too much. The happy stupid don’t see the problem.” People with joie de vivre, after all, are simply not paying attention.

“It’s not the end of the world,” Dr. Armandou said with a Gallic shrug. “It’s the end of one world.”

The French have higher rates of taking antidepressants and committing suicide than most other Europeans. And while arguing about how to move forward, they feel trapped in the past, weighed down by high unemployment and low hopes, the onerous taxes that drove Gérard Depardieu to flee, conflicts with immigrants, political scandals, Hollande fatigue, Germany envy, economic stagnation, a hyperelitist education system, and cold, rainy weather that ruined the famous Paris spring. Instead of confronting the questions at hand — how to adjust to globalization and compete with the Chinese — the French are grieving their lost stature and glorious past, stretching back to the colonial empire, the Lumières, the revolution, Napoleon, even the Jazz Age writers and artists. They’re stuck in a sentimental time warp as vivid as the one depicted in Woody Allen’s “Midnight in Paris.”

“In 1945, France was on the losers’ side, but this reality has long been masked by the political speeches of General de Gaulle and François Mitterrand: they both maintained, in their own way, the idea that it remained a great power promised to an exceptional destiny,” the historian Christophe Prochasson told Le Monde. “After they left office, the French continued to live on that belief.” Today, he added, this illusion is disappearing gradually and “France is a country in mourning.” What is lacking now in France, he said, is the music of history, “the capacity to contemplate tomorrows that sing.”

It doesn’t help that as they come to grips with their dashed illusions of grandeur, the French find out that their own government and America’s have them under the spyglass. “L’Oncle Sam se comporte très, très mal” (Uncle Sam behaves very, very badly), Le Monde scolded in a front-page editorial last Monday.

“I know we can be unbearable but not to the point where you are entitled to put mics at our place,” said Philippe Manière, the managing partner of Footprint management consultants.

A 2011 BVA-Gallup poll conducted in 51 countries revealed that the French were even more pessimistic than Afghans and Iraqis. As the sociologist François Dubet told Le Monde, “If France doesn’t get all the Olympic medals and all the Nobel Prizes, the French consider it hopeless.”

Manière complains about how “disgusting” the Disneyfied Champs-Élysées has become, with hordes of teenage tourists snapping pictures of themselves in front of Ladurée, the macaroon shop, and pictures of the French without even a “s’il vous plait.”

“The intersection of globalization and the French spirit is especially painful,” he said. “We have this feeling that everything we were used to is disappearing and what we are offered is not as good.” The French gave up the franc but don’t want to give up anything else to mesh into a bland global society.

“The French are very conceptual, very cerebral,” Manière said. “We need to have more than food and TV. In America, it is not treason of an ideal if you want to watch TV all day, whereas in France it is.”

It is a measure of their desperation that the French have become fixated on American-style happiness studies. Claudia Senik, a professor at the Paris School of Economics and the Sorbonne, has become a media darling discussing her research on French malaise. Living in France, with its unyielding judgments about talent and its locked labor market, reduces the probability of being happy by 20 percent, she says.

Though everyone else flocks here to be dazzled, the French are less satisfied than the average European. She calls it “a cultural trait” linked not only to circumstance but to values, beliefs and behaviors passed from generation to generation, and exacerbated by madly competitive schools that are hard on self-esteem. In others words, unhappiness has been bred into the French bone. When French citizens emigrate, she said, they take their tristesse with them.

“Our happiness function is a little deficient,” she said over espresso at Le Rostand across from the Jardin du Luxembourg. “It’s really in the French genome.”


USA Passport: France, Switzerland


John Morrison Chapel Hill, NC
It seems fashionable to trash France these days. Bear some facts in mind.

1. They spend half what we do on health care with better results. And no one is heaved out onto the street because he can't pay an outrageously inflated hospital bill.

2. The French eat better than we do and have less obesity.

3. They scowl at "helicopter parenting" which is a rank weed in the landscape of American culture.

4. They have a strong belief that a balanced life is important. No, the overworked American is not more productive and he ain't that happy either.

Do they need to have a more agile economic system? Yes. But they don't need the meatgrinder we have relegated ourselves to as a (very sorry) nation.



Mike Roddy Yucca Valley, California
The French are better than we are, because they like to think in depth about anything whatsoever. Americans were always a little weak here, but now we're a joke. Only in America can a politician get in front of a camera, deny global warming, say he answers only to The Lord, and keep his hands in the trough. It's because the voters are too stupid to pay attention, and if we do, we're too lazy to call them on it and kick them out.

Maureen, I fear that you misunderstand ennui and unhappiness, too. French intellectuals for centuries have distrusted the happy, untroubled soul. It's because once you comprehend the idiocy and meaningless of the world, it should lead to despair, or you're not paying attention.

Further evidence of French superiority is Paris. The buildings are beautiful, and built to last. More important, even today's Frenchwomen have an unforced sexiness about them that makes our public idols like Aniston and Kardashian look like Walmart dolls. French women have full, sexy lips, but they're real, and they move, it's all instinct. When they think, on the other hand, it's with a functioning mind.

I think I'll move there. Marriage proposals from Paris accepted.



Larry Eisenberg nyc
Anatole France, Zola & Manet,
What a brilliant cultural display!
No centuries of slaves,
Or segregation knaves,
Grows more secular by the day.

Ms Dowd sees the French through her eyes,
Not kindly, her insights unwise,
Sees a land in distress,
Minus our Repub mess,
Chacun à son goût I surmise.


Clyde Wynant Pittsburgh, PA, USA
If the French are distressed, I can fully understand why, for they have much to lose. For many reasons, we don't. In the U.S., we measure history in decades, not centuries. We build ticky tacky malls and then tear them down a scan't twenty years later, only to be replaced by even more hideous public buildings. And our citizens applaud such "progress." To us, new is better. We never learned that newness is transitory....

One stroll through The Marais is more life-affirming than a day-long trudge through most American cities, where humans are considered a "problem" to be dealt with, so that the cars can hurtle forward at full speed and where buildings are built not to accomodate those beings, but to impress the Board of DIrectors.

Nostalgia for the past can be maudlin and pointless, when it seeks to evoke a "time that never was," but I believe the French know better.


George Michigan
I think this is exactly like talking only to people in Georgetown and the Upper East Side (which might be only one place in Paris) and then writing about how "Americans" are feeling about the world.



Jim Lockard Ventura County, CA
We just spent 6 weeks there - Paris, Lourdes, Bordeaux and Amboise - everything seemed just fine with those we spoke with. My sense is that the column focuses on a certain socio-economic level of the Parisian population. We heard laughter, saw couples embracing, and people enjoying themselves everywhere we went. And we did not encounter a single snooty waiter.


Carolyn Egeli Valley Lee, Md.
I don't blame the French for being upset. Globalization has ruined so many wonderful cultures, with its dreadful homogenizing of everything. Watching HGTV shows of international real estate is downright depressing over all. The same housing all over the world and the same businesses too, makes me sad. I love to visit Paris, and had some close friends there for many years. Paris is a treasure. And so is the population of the French. But then I love Europe. They seem to know how to live. They savor things.


Mary Scott NY
“We have this feeling that everything we were used to is disappearing and what we are offered is not as good.”

Ms. Dowd could, indeed, have been writing about the US.

"Hello, sadness" reflects the state of mind of so many Americans.




Rob DL Connecticut
What is most unsettling is that this article about a fragmented, fearful, and dissatisfied France can also apply to many nations in the West, including the United States.

The world today enjoys the highest standard of living it's ever known, but it sure doesn't feel like it. We see scientific breakthroughs that seem to belong to a different planet when compared to the many negative stories we have to endure everyday across the news. Computers, smartphones, and all these wonderful gadgets that facilitate our lives -- even entertaining us when we want -- are not enough to cloak what seems to be a very insecure world on the brink of something unpleasant.

I don't know what France needs. I don't know what we need. There is certain to be no silver bullet for any country's problems. But what I fear most, not just in France but in capitals across the globe, is a modern-day Robespierre with an appeal that's enough to tip the scales in favor of a reality we don't want.

Demagogues are the most destabilizing menaces in a depressed economy and culture. With a President here at home dipping in the polls, and a European Union that continues to struggle to justify why it shouldn't be dissolved, one can't help but feel a power vacuum starting to form. With high unemployment and one culture after the next bemoaning the loss of national identity, the climate seems right for a gifted orator to captivate the masses. If that happens, like history promises, we may be in for a long ride.



Kevin Rothstein Jarama Valley
The French will always have their culture; their art; their architecture; their food; their music.

Most of all, the French will always have Paris.

The French will also always have the best national anthem: 'La Marseillaise".

Although most of us are familiar with the music, here is a taste of some of the lyrics; food for thought, especially in these trying times:

To Arms, Citizens
Form Your Battalions
March, March
Let Impure Blood Water our Furrows

And of course, without French assistance, we would still be singing "God Save The Queen".

Vive France!! Vive America!!



Scott W Chapel Hill, NC
Maybe there is a correlation between happiness/contentness and mediocrity. Lots of Americans are very happy eating processed food at chain restaurants, but that does not mean the experience is better than eating like the French. The French just pay more attention to their food, wine, and public spaces, demanding the best and maybe always worrying the quality is slipping. If I had one day left to live, would I rather spend it in Paris, or . . .?



Doug Broome Vancouver
Ma chere Madame Dowd, to be pessimistic is to be French.
It is the Americans who pursue mindless happiness while the French are surrounded everywhere by the great slogan of the Revolution: Liberty, Equality, Fraternity (community). And equality means equality, so don't pity a whiner like Depardieu.
Americans worship their economic elites; the French worship their intellectual elites, regarding their billionaires as occasionally necessary evils to be taxed.
Madame, if you will ouvrez vos yeux, you will note that the French exhibit their pessimism over wonderful food and wine free of the tasteless toxicity of industrial agriculture.
And should existence weigh down on them, they have the world's best medical system to help them.
You refer to "unyielding judgments about talent and its locked labor market."
In the U.S. workers are disposable objects of the oligarchy. In France, workers have rights and neoconservatism is rightly despised as anti-human. The economy serves the people.
The highest universities, les grandes ecoles, are accessible only through merit. Like all of education, they are tuition free. The French are a people who watch intellectual discussion on television and where glorious theatre and opera offer cheap seats for the disadvantaged though the country is largely free of the poverty of America. Education starts at three, and is free.
What the French do not like is the gross materialism and maladroitness of Americans. They value liberty, equality, fraternity.


tom mcmahon millis ma
Perhaps if the French are in such bad straits we, the United States should help them. For all the French bashing, socialist calling, ill will names that are perpetrated upon the French by inconsiderate Americans. Maybe they should all remember if not for the French, the American revolution would not have succeeded. The French are a long and proud people, who have tolorated immense immigration form afar, An influx of devout Muslims, and Africans, have not complained too loudly about it. It has strained social services, furthered unemployment. The EEC is a mess. France insured birth of the United States, it being the 4th of July weekend what could be a more apropo time to say thank you in lieu of, oh I can't say it, flagged it gets me !



Mr. Grolsch Prospect, Kentucky
France is uniquely France and something America will never be. But, then, America is exceedingly uniquely America and something no other country (save maybe Canada, on a bad day) could ever be. I remember the slightly rude cab driver in Paris who, realizing how close to the line he had gone, directed his passenger-seat German Shepherd to bark "Au Revoir" to the nice Americans as we were delivered to Georges Pompidou Centre from the Champs Elysee. And for those for whom the cities of France are too much, God bless the French countryside and the villagers who welcome Americans even as the same villagers may scorn our country's politics but politely ask if we agree with our President. The 1%/47% phenomena are as present in major French cities as they are in their American counterparts, but Frenchmen and women have a maturity and an at least apparent wisdom about life that we do not. A wisdom my wife thinks comes from the frail little women carrying their daily baguettes on the sidewalks from the stores, their faces lined with the reality of World War II, its prelude and aftermath.



Rima RegasMission Viejo, CA
“We are connecting with nostalgia. What is nostalgia? Where the present doesn't agree with the hope that you got in the past.”

These words may have been uttered by a philosophical Frenchmen, but they are certainly applicable on this side of the pond. I keep hoping that the aftermath of the 2010 election that brought our own moroseness to the forefront, will be followed by the 2012 election spunk. We all need a big dose of it for election 2014, if we are to effect the needed changes that will make our present agree with the hope we had in the past.

As for the French? They'll snap out of it too. For all of their plaintive wails of the moment, their pride and ingenuity has always won the day. La Marsellaise, which every French citizen knows, contains these fighting words:

Tremblez, tyrans ! et vous, perfides,
L'opprobre de tous les partis,
Tremblez ! vos projets parricides
Vont enfin recevoir leur prix ! (bis)
Tout est soldat pour vous combattre,
S'ils tombent, nos jeunes héros,
La France en produit de nouveaux,
Contre vous tout prêts à se battre

--

Tremble, tyrants! and you, traitors,
The disgrace of all groups,
Tremble! Your parricidal plans
Will finally pay the price! (repeat)
Everyone is a soldier to fight you,
If they fall, our young heros,
France will make more,
Ready to battle you!

It's time we all snap out of our collective funk.



JT FLORIDA Venice, FL
In your column, you devote 176 words to the musings of a fashion designer's dentist on Avenue Hoche regarding his views about the current mindset of the French.

I would suggest that you get out and talk to average French people. While sipping espresso in the Jardin du Luxembourg with a professor who quantified a 20% "reduction of happiness" due to "unyielding judgments about talent and its locked labor markets", I wish you could have asked her to walk with you around different parts of Paris to see if the reality of meeting real French people squares with her conclusions. Better yet, do it yourself.

Also, go outside of Paris in the summer where French people go to enjoy their concept of "working to live" rather than "living to work." We can learn from the French.



Janice Badger Nelson Park City, Utah, from Boston
"There is but one Paris and however hard living may be here, and if it became worse and harder even – the French air clears up the brain and does good – a world of good." -Vincent Willem van Gogh

So true. Cannot wait to go back this summer.


reader, writer Northern NM
I love France and the French.
It's not the same as when I was there about a half century ago. Les Halles was still in existence. I saw Edith Piaf sing at the 'Bobino' with her ami Theo Sappo. Bud Powell was playing at the 'Blue Note'. And I was a student at the Sorbonne. I love the food, the architecture; the "je ne sais quoi".
Most of all they believe there are more important things than money.
Vive la France with all their imperfections.



simzap Orlando
To perk up their spirits maybe the French should visit Newark and Disneyland. In the one you have the industrial slag that's the end product of consumerism. In the other the banal silly escape that we allow ourselves to make believe the consumerism doesn't lead to the Rustbelt or Bangladesh. The French should feel lucky and proud. And, If they don't they only have to go out and see places that aren't as great as France.



virginia c. maxwell london
We spend half the year in a little French village in South West France - the picture you paint is unrecognizable to us. The markets, the excellent schools, the self sufficiency, the close family ties ..... the excellent hospitals and medical care, infrastructure in good shape --hmmmn



Jose Lopez Argentina
I prefer not to generalize but... Better read and educated people tend to think more comprehensively and by extension better understand the massive challenges that confront us as a species in the 21st century. I know both France and the US quite well and overall the French are far better read and educated than people in the US-- this is especially true in the humanities, philosophy, and the arts- the reflective fields. In France, critical thinking, complex objective analysis, and self reflection is highly valued. Unlike in the US, the French do not believe that there is a tech fix for all that ails you. As a species, we are in it up to our chins - some recognize it others don't.



USA Passport: USA, Singapore, Austria, Germany, Switzerland



Stephen C. Joseph, MD Santa Fe, NM
As many have said above, Paris (especially Couture Paris) is not France, just as BosWash is not America.
As for all the downsides, Maureen, they are not, most unfortunately, unique to today's France.
What country is not currently disgusted by bad government, worried about aimless youth, distressed by shallow and meaningless 'entertainment', terrified by economic uncertainty, hapless at the zoom of technology, adrift in a world turned upside down?
The French are, and have always been, ahead of the global philosophical and emotional curves. And the love/hate between us and them are only two faces in self-reflecting mirrors.



Chris McMorrow Waltham, Mass.
According to Ms. Dowd, " The French are grieving their lost stature and glorious past, stretching back to the colonial empire, the Lumières, the revolution, Napoleon, even the Jazz Age writers and artists." I've got a secret for you, Maureen: the French have been grieving that for a long, long time, not just since Hollande.

During a recent 2-weeks vacation in Paris, my first trip back since my 20s, I was struck by several things that didn't jibe at all with what the guidebooks say about the French.

First, I was hard pressed to find anyone even remotely elegantly dressed. Paris was as slobby as many parts of the US.

Second, the food was simply not as good as I remember it. In fact, the Globe carried an article just last Sunday attesting to what my boyfriend and I had begun to suspect: Outside of a 5-star restaurant, many restaurants are all ordering their food pre-made to be heated up in microwaves. Mon Dieu! It explains why our repeated repasts of confit au canard, boeuf au poivre, et crème brulee, all had a certain sameness to them. The food "scandale" is so upsetting that the government is considering regulations to force restaurants to reveal the source of their menu options.

So, if the French seem more pessimistic than usual these days--and not just due to their recession--it's understandable why. Bad dress, bad food, and bad weather all in the same year? It's enough to make a grown Frenchman (and woman) cry.



William Dufort Montreal
“The French are very conceptual, very cerebral,” Manière said. “We need to have more than food and TV. In America, it is not treason of an ideal if you want to watch TV all day, whereas in France it is.”

That may be. But I beg to differ. I am what you wold call a French-Canadian. My French ancestor came here in the mid1600. We still speak French, my first language, as you may have noticed.

My family and I share an apartment in Sète, a town in the south of France, where I spend at least a few weeks a year. We do not meet the fashion people who you mingle with. But I am happy to count a lot of French citizens as friends. And, believe it or not, they are not what you describe. They are just normal people, like my friends, here in Montreal or in Vermont, where I used to have a boat on Lake Champlain. they, the French, have gotten over Napoleon years ago, so stop portraying them as some kind of zombies.

I don't really know what point is, but what I can tell you is this: People, in France, in America, in Canada and Quebec and the world over want peace and liberty.

Unfortunately, a lot of governments are on the wrong side of the equation.

France: man on bicycle transporting animal hides (1934)

kila Oregon
Mlle. Dowd would probably have a less elitist take on the present French mentality if she left the chic arrondissements and went out to the 'burbs and the countryside and the smaller cities. That's where people do not feel that M. Depardieu's tax rate is so affreuse, that M. Hollande's socialist government should not have ministers with undeclared Swiss accounts and Mme Sarkozy shouldn't be flying on the public tab. The French aren't suffering from malaise. They are suffering from justifiable rage.





JT FLORIDA Venice, FL
We can learn from the French. After their debacle in Vietnam ended in 1954, the U.S. engaged in the same for its longest war until Afghanistan and the outcome in Vietnam was a loss of lives and prestige for the United States. The French correctly pointed out the folly of Iraq and while participating with the U.S. in Afghanistan, they urged caution about surges.

We are linked to France in so many respects. As you toss around a few French phrases in your column, be reminded that about two thirds of English comes from French.

Enjoy your time in France and please, before using words like 'rude' and 'malaise' to describe the French, talk to ordinary citizens about their lives and I think you will find that while they see many challenges ahead, the social critics in the fashion industry, films and even newspapers aren't always accurate.



Ellen Balfour Long Island
I believe the Germans have a word for this French malaise: Weltschmerz, which means world pain, a dissonance between what is and what one wants it to be. Sacre bleu! I am not French, but I do feel a kinship with their values.



B CA
Eh, bien: the ability to maintain traditional French culture has waned since the early 1990's. Part of l'ennui has been the creeping Americanization that began during that decade, from mergers and lay-offs to McDonald's and disposable to-go coffee cups.

The French are right to feel that France is no longer French. The problem is not immigrants or smoking bans, but global corporates taking over.

It's telling that Dowd interviewed not France's modern-day Emile Zola, but... a French management consultant. Vraiment.

Still, it's not over for the country that gave us Hugo, Flaubert, Balzac, and the beacon of truth, Zola. Grab your copy of Zola's "Germinal", Scott, we'll be waiting "aux barricades"!




gblico paris
Most of the negative reactions to Ms Dowd's column seem to be from people who have visited France but have really never lived there. In order to truly understand the French you need to live in France. Being a tourist or an otherwise occasional visitor won't cut it. My wife and I have lived in France for the past 10 years, a period during which we've gained invaluable insights and knowledge about a great country - enough to agree almost completely with everything Ms Dowd has said!



Jeanette Pontacq Point Reyes Station, CA
The French have indeed lost something they treasured ..... France. The former country is now directed from Bruxelles by unelected technocrats. The new President is unloved and boring. Elites genuflect before Germany and the United States. And their vaunted culture is about to disappear via the new free-trade deal.

The French people, like the Americans, thought they were electing someone who would change things for the better and pay attention to them. Instead, like us, they got the reverse.

But at least they still have wonderful cuisine, socialized medicine, long vacations (if they have work), and charming cities and villages. We should be so lucky.



Ben New York City
Many of the points Ms. Dowd raises are conceptually correct. The focus of this being in France is something I can only listen to. I've been to France 3 times, and sadly in Paris three times I've been food poisoned, robbed at gunpoint and nearly pushed off the observatory deck on the Eifful Tower. Having said that, I still esteem the Left bank and the world Henry Miller wrote about, if not glorified. It seems that globalization is eating away at the heartstrings of us all. I agree that IS a sad state...but...we are only in the opening innings of this game. The digital age is less than 20 years old and we need to see if the tearing away of culture is the burning of the forrest to purge disease so a bountiful prosperity can grow anew.

Or at least, I'd hope so.

The problem is we may NOT have an above ground culture for future generations because the WWW (that is, world without wonder) might take 1000 years to clean itself of the toxins we've spewed into the atmosphere.

We've all grown too quickly taking basic nature for granted. One day we shall not have basic resources...THEN the sadness of our current state shall be rationalized.



PT Taiwan
The France you see as a tourist and the France you experience as a resident are two different things. Case in point: I got terribly sick while studying in France and had to stay in the hospital for close to a month. The whole family panicked at the thought of an exorbitant medical bill since my travel insurance doesn't cover what they deem a non-emergency illness and my parents were preparing to take out some of their savings to pay for it when I was finally discharged. Much to our surprise, not only were I promptly enrolled in "Couverture Maladie Universelle" (Universal Illness Coverage), the hospital stay itself and all related medical costs were retroactively covered. More importantly, the French doctors who treated me took time to go over my medical history and diagnosed me with a rare genetic condition which had gone on unnoticed in my native country for several years since its onset.

I doubt my fate would be the same had I been studying English in an Anglo-Saxon country.





The 9th Waltham, MA
It's probably more that we're waking up to just how badly we've let the world slip away from us and fall into the hands of perhaps the most criminal set of governments we've ever been aware of. The best and worst of times, the summer of our discontent, heading for a winter of same, and sensing the chaos of communications that messes with all of nature's cicadian (sic,) rhythms (those 1ce-every-17-years cycles). And these are the times that try men's soles and heels, as we pound the pavement looking for jobs, hoping to find a way to walk the oceans or teleport ourselves, as we can't afford the fare Our manufacturing has been torpedoed by Bangalore, under-bid by Beijing, but one happy fella buys up rusting machines and parts from dead US plants and sells to China--his own Youth In Asia program, while over here we're heading for the real kind of euthanasia or, unwilling participants that we are, preparing for a walk on the genocide.

Who wouldn't feel morosité at the miseries we hired to run our government for us. A speaker of the housers claimed to repeal impeachment by incanting, "Impeachment is off the table." Our current president (was he jokin' us when he claimed to have lectured law students in Con. Law for a decade? He doesn't even know that you cannot amend the Constitution by secret "presidential findings, holdings, decision statements, or even by statute. And his attorney general is a holder of the view that "due process" and "judicial process" are distinguishable.



France vs. USA - Las Vegas

Blog Archive