Showing posts with label Francesco. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Francesco. Show all posts

Thursday, April 01, 2021

Francesco: Streaming Now

Juan Carlos Cruz meets Pope Francis
Courtesy Francesco Docet Production
Even though I'm a “media nun,” I'm not a big movie person. (It's a sensory overload thing.) Still, I follow events in the world of cinema, read movie reviews (“film critiques”), and try to apply basic media literacy approaches to the movies and TV shows that I do choose to watch. (That last is a skill I think we all need to keep practiced in!)

This week, I did watch a movie. The documentary Francesco premiered at the Rome Film Festival last fall and became available worldwide via streaming as of Palm Sunday. Clocking in at 1 hour 56 minutes, it's a beautiful film, but a bit overly long. (I had to watch it in two sittings.) The film could be seen as a presentation of the Pope's attempts over his (so far) eight year pontificate to emphasize the fundamental importance of the human person as such, prescinding anything a particular individual may have done or might be able to offer the world. 

“I am not a religious person,” director Evgeny Afineevsky said. “And my movie is not about the Catholic Church. It’s about a man who leads an important institution, it’s about understanding, faith, and something much bigger than the Church.” 

Afineevsky recognizes that Pope Francis pays remarkable attention to people. If the Pope draws attention to “issues,” it is not to draw converts to an ideology, but to show the living human beings whose lives and well-being are at risk—often because of the political, financial, or ideological interests of the powerful. The director may not quite get it, but the human person is central for Pope Francis, because the human person is central for God as “the only creature on earth which God willed for itself” (Vatican II: Gaudium et Spes, 24). 

This is why Pope Francis keeps finding ways to draw the world's attention to human dignity, human rights, and concrete human needs. One example of this that was powerfully brought out in the film was his 2017 trip to Myanmar, just three months after Rohingya villages in Myanmar began to be destroyed (by the military that has now taken murderous control of the country). Rohingya refugees (at least 600,000 of them) flooded Bangladesh. So immediately after leaving Myanmar, the Pope went to Bangladesh. In the film, a representative of the Sant'Egidio community explained that wherever the Pope goes, journalists go, “and then the world will see.” And indeed, testified one Muslim refugee: “Ever since he came to visit us, our lives have changed. All the NGO's [non-governmental organizations] from around the world come... For that, we pray a lot for Pope Francis.”

The film reminded me of some the places the Pope had been carrying out this ministry of pointing the world's attention to suffering: Syria, Armenia, the Philippines, Auschwitz... The director did not fail to direct our attention also to the suffering that was needlessly perpetuated within the Church herself. The sex abuse crisis, specifically in Chile, was covered through the story of Juan Carlos Cruz (see photo), victim of a notorious priest-abuser whose crimes had been covered up for decades. Pope Francis had believed that the accusations were slanderous and said so publicly. But when a Vatican investigator brought back over a thousand pages of evidence the Pope admitted his mistakes in judgment publicly and apologized to the abuse victims, one on one.

Some segments of the film could be fruitfully used to illustrate areas of Catholic Social Teachings, except for the Church's teachings surrounding marriage, which the director seems not to grasp at all. But then, how could he be expected to? St Paul says that the bond of husband and wife is “a great mystery bespeaking Christ and the Church” (see Ephesians 5:31-33). It is theology, not simply a social reality. Pope John Paul's Theology of the Body relates the mutual self-giving of the Trinity to the creation of human beings, man and woman, in the image of God. This makes marriage, as Pope John Paul said, a primordial sacrament: a first “outward expression of an interior mystery of grace,” the grace of God's own life which we are invited to participate in “on earth and in Heaven.” Don't go looking for that in Francesco. But realize that this is the deep mystery that the Church perceives whenever marriage and family life are the issue. As a visible expression of the Trinity, it is not a mystery that any of us can understand.

The clip that caused such a stir at the Rome Film Festival came just after the halfway point in the film. It began with a two minute story of a same-sex couple with three children. As the video shifts between family photos and scenes of the Pope at Mass, Andrea Rubera tells of going to the Pope's Mass at Santa Marta three years earlier and delivering a letter asking about religious formation for his children, then of a phone call from the Pope telling him to go ahead and bring the children to the parish. “He didn't mention which was his opinion about my family. Probably he's following the doctrine on this point,” Rubera notes. I would have let the story end right there, but Afineevsky needed to make a point, and here he did something a bit underhanded.

The video shifts definitively from the family to scenes at Mass and to Pope Francis in an office (we now know this was footage from a Mexican television interview). The Pope's words, in Spanish, seem to comment on the story we have just heard: "Homosexual people have the right to be in a family…. They are children of God and have a right to a family…. " In the original audio context, the Pope was pleading that homosexual sons and daughters not be cast out of their parents' homes, and (in a separate question) referring to a civil union law proposed in Argentina ten years earlier, which he supported (as an alternative same-sex marriage). But the way the Pope's phrases were cut and moved around, and even more the way these 18 seconds of audio were placed after a full two-minute story about a particular gay couple gives the impression that this was the kind of family people “have a right to.” That is misleading. The Pope was clearly speaking about a gay person's family of origin. That in the source interview Pope Francis explicitly (and in rather brutal terms) ruled out “homosexual marriage” made it very clear what he intended. I wrote at length about this matter in November, and created a graphic that shows the Pope's original words and how they were cut and repositioned in Francesco.

Given that one of Pope Francis' hallmarks that of welcoming people with whom he disagrees on certain, sometimes fundamental, matters, I was disappointed that the director chose to be so disrespectful of the Pope as to alter the context and even the ordering of his words. If anything, the director could have had people acknowledge their perplexity that Francis continues to affirm age-old Church teachings on marriage and the family while being so genuinely open to people whose lives do not mirror the Catholic ideal (but seriously: whose life does?). 

As long as it is, Francesco is certainly not a complete look at the Pope's defense of human life and dignity. There is nothing about unborn life, no defense of disabled persons, the terminally ill, the elderly; no mention of the striking condemnation of the “throwaway culture,” an expression with which the Pope indicts all callous disregard of human dignity (including the degradation of the environment). Well, Afineevsky is a filmmaker, not a catechist. Francesco is a beautiful film. It is stunningly produced, moving in its message. Watch it, but don't be lazy about it. 

Know your own prejudices, expectations, and sacred cows. Are you “looking for trouble”? Just...don't. 

If there's anything that strikes you as weird, out of place, illogical, a non-sequitur, or an editorial imposition, hit the pause button. Note the time stamp and a few key words, including the place or year of the setting. Later you can look for the original context of a remark, or for the occasion on which it was given (what was going on then and there?). You can easily find transcripts of the Pope's talks from his trips on the Vatican website to get the full context for the snippets that are included in the film.

In some parts of the movie, the Pope's voice switches from Italian (the language he uses in most formal occasions) to Spanish. That's a signal that the source has changed, too. That means that the English subtitles do not really follow one from the other in the Pope's thought. They are edited to flow in that order. Can you find the original context? If the Spanish language remarks include video footage of the Pope in a room with dark gold wallpaper, it is probably from a 2019 interview with Valentina Alazraki (Televisa, Mexico). (A partial transcript from that interview is available online in Spanish.)

Unpack the Pope's original talks and homilies for yourself. Pray with them. Study them! Use the film for enrichment, but don't make it your primary source for understanding Pope Francis. The film is Afineevsky's vision, and he is not a believer. He does not realize something that you and I and Pope Francis have been given to understand: that, unique in all the cosmos, people are the living image and likeness of God. Even more, that each and every person is someone for whom Jesus, God Incarnate, willingly gave his life. 

In each and every person, Pope Francis sees Jesus, really sees him. Christ emptied himself and made our human nature his own, “For by His incarnation the Son of God has united Himself in some fashion with every man” (Vatican II: Gaudium et Spes, 22). 

And that's the mystery we are entering into in the deepest way possible this weekend.

Blessed Triduum!


Friday, October 30, 2020

Francesco: What Just Happened? UPDATED Nov 2, 7

Fasten your seat belts. This is a really long post. I've had to take all week to work on it because the subject merited research and reflection. This is also being included in my community's newsletter (welcome to all who have come from that link).

Francesco: What Just Happened?

Until ten days ago, if you had asked me to name some international film festivals, I could have come up with a few: the Venice Film Festival, Cannes (the glamorous one), Toronto, and Sundance (for independent films). And then came October 21 and the world premiere of Evgeny Afineevsky’s Francesco. Suddenly the whole world was paying attention to the Rome Film Festival.

Francesco is a documentary about Pope Francis which incorporates footage from a variety of sources, including the Vatican’s own archives. (The Vatican did not exercise any editorial control over the film.) Director Afineevsky is clearly taken with the Holy Father as a man open to all people, someone who does not put human beings into categories. Afineevsky calls Francis “a man of action,” “pro-life” in the most expansive sense of the term.

Somewhere in the course of 1 hour and 56 minutes comes Pope Francis’ familiar voice, in Spanish:

"Homosexual people have the right to be in a family…. They are children of God and have a right to a family…. Nobody should be thrown out or be made miserable over it…. What we have to have is a civil union law—that way they are legally covered. I supported that."

For the film festival audience, those words were an 18-second bombshell. The first headlines presented the Pope as “changing” a position and even a teaching on same-sex marriage. A media storm ensued. That should not be surprising. Why would an audience composed primarily of movie directors, producers, screenwriters, reviewers, actors, etc., be familiar with the Pope’s many remarks on the subject, or the doctrinal and ecclesial contexts surrounding them? 

What is problematic is not that secular media got this so wrong. It is that some Catholics (including bishops and Catholic media professionals) took those news headlines at face value and responded to them as if they genuinely conveyed something “new” and “unexpected” from the Pope.

Leaping headlong from the headlines

Headlines are just that: “lines” devoid of context.

For many hearers, the Pope’s words (as reported in social media headlines) seemed to indicate approval of so-called “civil unions” as a possible analogue for same-sex marriage. Activists hastened to raise cheers of victory, while some defenders of doctrine and tradition suggested it was time to abandon ship, and even some priests and bishops intimated that Pope Francis just wasn’t that good for the Church. (Seriously.)

All this on the basis of an 18-second video clip, or, in some cases, media reports about it.

First, everyone responded to the headlines.

Then they responded to each other’s responses.

What none of them did in those first heady hours, it seems, was try to find out if Pope Francis really said what the headlines reported, leaving the vast majority of listeners totally ignorant of how the Pope actually expressed himself. 

No one had looked for that.

And yet hints of a fuller truth were available the whole time. The people at Where Peter Is suspected that the clip was a composite. In his blog, Father Matthew Schneider, LC, did the grunt work of comparing the Francesco clip to the source video (from 2019). Father Schneider found a significant portion of the original video (and a transcript of it) right on the Vatican website. Contrary to the director’s early assertions, this interview had not been conducted by Evgeny Afineevsky, but by Valentina Alazraki for the Mexican communications agency Televisa.

Schneider’s work makes two things clear: First, that the 18-second clip in Francesco is an intricately composed mosaic of phrases taken from different parts of the 2019 interview, and second, that Pope Francis has long sought a way of avoiding any kind of equivalence between same-sex partnerships and natural marriage.

Contrary to the assertion of many Catholic contrarians, this is not a matter of the Holy Father being ambiguous. This is a case of a film director moving words around and eliminating clear statements within the very context in which he gave them.

So What Did the Pope Really Say?

The following is a graphic showing a computer translation of the part of the 2019 interview from which the 18-second clip was created.  In bold are words of the Holy Father that have been, to put it mildly, “overlooked.” Phrases are highlighted to show the editing: the first phrase heard in the 18 second clip is highlighted in orange, the second in yellow, the third in green. The words in blue (the final words of the 18-second clip) are not available in the Vatican transcript, but are reported in the October 24 issue of America magazine by Gerard O’Connell, who had access to the complete interview; the translation of that text is his.

From the color code and from the altered order, it is clear how highly edited the 18 seconds from Francesco are. 

Pope Francis has complained about his plain meaning being misconstrued by the media. Ironically, the film Francesco takes a sentence from one of these very complaints and uses it in just that way. (It is providential that this happened right before Media Literacy Week in the U.S. Could we ask for a clearer example of the need for media literacy in the Catholic Church, especially among users of social media?) 

It is interesting that bloggers were the first to notice and parse out the editing that created so much confusion. Of the professional Catholic media, America magazine offered the most thorough treatment, with Rome correspondent Gerard O’Collins finally getting access to the full, unedited version of the 2019 interview, though that took several days. Some other Catholic media and media personalities complained that “the Vatican” should to do more to respond to similar misunderstandings and distortions—but where there are Catholic media professionals in a culture, isn’t it part of their mission to notice and respond to such things?

Money, not truth

Headlines are summaries, but they are also spin: interpretations that often miss or skew the point for the sake of drawing readers, clicks, retweets. In the Internet economy, these are what generate income for headline producers. The more radical the headline, the more money it makes for the organization behind it, including “Catholic” organizations that traffic in the Pope’s name, words, and image.

Catholics should not depend on secular filmmakers for their understanding of what the Pope teaches or be surprised when “the world” acts like… the world. We do not get our knowledge of the faith from media headlines or from media (not even Catholic media!), but from the Magisterium.

Context is vital in understanding not only the words of the Holy Father, but the reactions on the ground, especially from people who pride themselves on being faithful Catholics. So many of the reactions I saw on Twitter and Facebook reflected fear, anxiety, confusion and anguish. There is a context for that, too.

This media storm happened a week and a half before an emotionally charged U.S. Presidential election, and (again, in the U.S.) during the politically divisive confirmation hearing for Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barret.

What all of three headliners have in common is leadership at the highest levels of their respective communities. 

It matters that people in key posts, whether in the Church, in government, in finance, business, medicine, education, etc., be people of integrity and knowledge. The survival of an enterprise cannot depend on the luck, pluck, or cunning of the person at the top. When it does, though, fear makes a lot of sense. When trust in the underpinnings of an institution runs low, it can be tempting to put all one’s hope in the person at the top. If people are longing for a specific kind of leadership, they may feel let down that Pope Francis refuses to conform to that image. 

As Catholics, we do not put our faith in the human character and personal qualities of the Pope. Our trust is in the promise Jesus made to Peter, the first man to hold that office.

Human Nature has not Changed.

In numerous ways, on many occasions, including his document on marriage (Amoris Laetitia), Pope Francis has refused to budge on the nature of marriage and the family. It was precisely this point he was confirming in the video passage that was surgically altered to create an 18-second clip. The Church’s teaching on marriage has not changed and will not change. It is close to the core of the faith itself, as Paul indicated in Ephesians (5:31-32), where he wrote that the one flesh union of husband and wife is a profound mystery that bespeaks “Christ and the Church.” 

What can change, and must change, are the ways Church institutions and ministers can best navigate society as it currently is, through changes of law, language, and expectations, while continuing to communicate the central truths and values of Divine revelation. When these are presented in a way that confirms the beauty, uniqueness and unrepeatability of the person we are with, those truths offer life in abundance. But defended with anxiety, fear, or even hostility, even the holiest truths can wreak damage on a soul. 

Pope Francis clearly thinks that government recognition of some kind of civil union (not necessarily limited to same-sex couples) could provide protection of important legal rights without creating a kind of quasi-marital institution that could compromise the rights of children to a mother and father. This is a moot point in the United States, where same-sex marriage has been the law since 2015.

As to the wisdom of this approach, Catholics are free to disagree with each other (and even with the Pope). But what is unacceptable is casting aspersions on the Pope as an authoritative and reliable teacher of faith. A Catholic’s default presumption should be one of respect for the Pope: for his person, for his authority, for his teaching. When people who offer commentary on matters of faith routinely respond to headlines about the Pope with anything but actual respect and a willingness to delve deeper, they are not recommending themselves to Catholics no matter what their position is, how many degrees in Sacred Theology they hold, or how many YouTube followers they have. At best, they may be intellectually lazy. 

Putting People First

Most of the reservations I saw to the Pope’s position seemed to assume that Francis was promoting something objectively wrong, or that was potentially “an occasion of sin,” or that was “redefining marriage” (which he explicitly ruled out in the same interview). The most revealing response I have seen to all this was published in The Washington Post by Catholic writer Eve Tushnet (the emphasis is mine). Tushnet opened by identifying herself as belonging to “the tiny community of LGBT Catholics who accept the church’s sexual ethic” and quickly got to the point: “[M]any Catholic priests and other leaders still assume that gay people’s biggest spiritual problem is lust, when in my experience the most common and deadly spiritual problem for gay Christians is despair.”

So many words about the Sixth Commandment…but, she says, this is not the problem people like her face on a day to day basis. The real issue is the most foundational commandment of all: the First Commandment, the one in which God, the Lord, is welcomed as the all-good Creator and Foundation and Goal of one’s life; the one who called us into being and sustains us at every instant out of love. Despair is the sin in which this God of love, goodness, and beauty remains unrecognized.

It is a core principle of psychology that one’s experience of parental love or rejection has profound implications for a person’s image of God. And so Pope Francis urges families, especially parents, not to reject their children with same-sex attraction. This is especially important in countries where people suspected of homosexual tendencies may be at risk of violence and even death. 

As a pastor of souls in Argentina, Pope Francis dealt closely with people who experienced same-sex attraction. He listened to them, “accompanied” them, shepherded them. They are not abstractions for Pope Francis: they are people with names and faces and personal, individual stories. They are not instances of “near occasions of sin,” but concrete people with experiences of rejection, despair, welcome, hope, peace, and growth. This focus on the individual person is a hallmark of Pope Francis’ ministry.

People’s spiritual survival (and sometimes their actual survival in this life) depends on their “knowing and believing in the love God has for us” (see 1 Jn 4:16). This is not trivial. This is the essence of evangelization. This is what the Church exists to proclaim.

What about the Rest of the Film?

I haven’t seen the documentary Francesco yet. If not for those unfortunately edited 18 seconds, it might have been something to recommend as the basis for conversations on a variety of topics with people of many faiths, or of no faith. Judging from the trailer, the almost two-hour long film may still be the basis for fruitful conversations with people on the Church’s peripheries, as long as the Catholics who go into a film viewing are sufficiently well-informed about the Pope’s convictions and teachings about marriage and about the dignity of the human person. 

The Pope Still Holds the Keys

Take a deep breath.

God is still in charge.

Jesus Christ is still the head of the Church. 

The Pope, yes, Pope Francis, still holds the keys.

What this means, practically speaking, is giving the Pope at the very least, the benefit of the doubt when it comes to provocative headlines in the media. 

Standing with Pope Francis, we will not be deceived. But we will have to work to stand with the Pope, whether it is Pope Francis this year, or some future Pope in years to come who may be quoted out of context. We cannot rely on middlemen who might be using his words, wittingly or not, inappropriately.

This gives us homework to do. We are to delve past the headlines, refusing to be sucked into a predetermined interpretation by the breathless declaration of unheard-of novelty or devilry coming from the only person on earth with a guarantee from Christ that “the gates of hell will not prevail” against the Church under his care (see Matt 16:18).


Watch the trailer here:

NOV 2: The Vatican has issued a statement about this; at the moment it is only available in Spanish. It confirms that the Holy Father was responding to different questions about completely different situations. https://wherepeteris.com/english-translation-of-vatican-response-to-francesco-documentary/

NOV 7: Here is a link to an October 30  letter from the Apostolic Nuncio to the US (Archbishop Christophe Pierre) to Archbishop Gomez, President of the US Catholic Bishops' conference: https://t.co/nIjpLzm3uV?amp=1

Here are my sources, plus some additional links you may find helpful:

Fr Matthew Schneider LC’s treatment, including going to the original video interview (and transcript) from which the controversial clip was taken: https://www.patheos.com/blogs/throughcatholiclenses/2020/10/pope-franciss-words-on-civil-unions-distorted-by-editing/
Fr Matthew Schneider LC’s follow-up, confirming that analysis of the full transcript of the original interview shows precisely what was edited out of the documentary, changing the meaning of the Pope’s words:

 

Gerard O'Connell is America magazine's Vatican Correspondent. Here is his article on the Vatican's Communications Dicastery and where it has been in all this: https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2020/10/24/pope-francis-vatican-communications-civil-union


Also from America, an article on Pope Francis' history of thought around civil unions; this article by Colleen Dulle was published the day after the Francesco premier: https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2020/10/22/pope-francis-gay-civil-union-lgtb-context-media-documentary


Two reflections on the context surrounding the Pope’s words and how video editing influences how words are understood:

 

 

Fr Agustino CFR has done a few videos as he tried to make sense of the clip. In this 10 min. video he corrects his earlier videos. He uses Franciscan Spirituality to inform and help listeners love the Church and “stay beside her.” https://www.facebook.com/padreagustino/videos/722836941654380/

 

Fr Raymond de Souza confirms that Pope Francis did not change Church teaching, recalling also Archbishop Levada’s decision in San Francisco about civil unions. (Levada was later made head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith by Pope Benedict XVI.):

 

Thomas Reese SJ affirms that Church teaching hasn’t changed; he includes reflection on how civil unions might impact areas of the world where homosexual persons are subject to loss of basic rights (his point #3).

Eve Tushnet in the Washington Post gives her perspective as a Catholic in the “LGBT community” who accepts the Church’s teachings on sexuality: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/10/24/what-does-pope-francis-believe-about-same-sex-love/

Statement by Cardinal Sean O’Malley:

 

“Pope Francis and Civil Unions,” statement by Archbishop Cordileone (San Francisco): https://sfarchdiocese.org/letters-and-statements