Loving Christian Civilization

On July 17, the Holy See published the Letter of His Holiness Pope Francis on the Role of Literature in Formation to encourage reading, not only among seminarians and priests, which was his first intention, but also among all the faithful.

We can only welcome the exhortation to all to read books in their leisure time (the letter is published on the occasion of summer vacation) rather than allow themselves to be overwhelmed by “our present unremitting exposure to social media, mobile phones and other devices” (no. 2).

Likewise, the Pontiff insists not only on the intellectual enrichment of the practice of reading, but also on the sympathy that language establishes between author and the reader, a theme dear to Francis.

Such an experience enables us to understand ourselves beyond what abstract ideas can express, to let ourselves be receptive to an unfamiliar point of view rather than protecting ourselves from it with a thick intellectual and emotional shell, and even on this occasion to understand ourselves better and perhaps to correct ourselves.

Reading the lives or writings of the saints is sometimes a fruitful opportunity for an examination of conscience. We regret, however, that there is not a word about the need to read in order to know and deepen one's own culture: to know the classics.

For it is also, alas, a tendency dear to Francis to rail against “the idols of a self-referential, falsely self-sufficient and statically conventional language” (no. 42) without any consideration for the filial piety that it is normal to practice for one's family, one's culture, one's civilization. [1]

Doesn't St. Paul proclaim his attachment to his people, and even his strictly Pharisaic training, to show that the faith he now preaches is merely its fulfillment? Didn't the Incarnate Word take on human nature in a specific region and at a specific time, and isn't His preaching reflected in the many details that the liturgy has adopted (“tabernacle,” “Lamb of God,” unleavened bread, etc.)?

God created nature and knows how it works; He created trees with roots and men in families. The Apostles and missionaries did not feel they had to forget who they were in order to make contact with all the peoples of the world.

As for contact between cultures, if you want to learn a language, you must already know your own; a writer once said that a poet only sings well when perched on his family tree. When you introduce yourself, you must know who you are in order to have something to introduce! But there is no such thing as an ideal, universal, disembodied man, except in the imaginary world of the Enlightenment, whose universalism cut off heads and sowed the seeds of revolution.

Moreover, it is natural that faith should permeate Christian life and that it should be expressed outwardly through art, public worship, and the organization of society in general. Anyone who is ashamed of the period in Europe during which the Catholic faith was able to develop simply does not love his faith, because he wants to keep it complex.

Loving the history from which we come is therefore not pride or self-importance; it is only natural, like loving one’s parents. It is a virtue called filial piety, especially blessed by God, for when we respect our parents, it is the image of God that we honor. Wokeism is just one version of the rejection of fatherhood. It is a pity that some of the great voices of the ecclesial world lend their hand to it.

Loving the truth we have received is not arrogance; it even proceeds from humility, since we recognize it as a free gift from God. Defending it against its opposite is not vicious, since the opposite of truth is falsehood, and falsehood is not lovable.

Cultivating knowledge of one's heritage is not the same as closing oneself off, and believing in an immutable truth is not the same as preventing discussion, since if we claim to “dialogue,” it must be in order to refine our knowledge of the truth; otherwise there will only be a “clash of monologues.”

For proof of this, simply take a look at what we call “public debate” today: the law of the strongest in media. There is nothing more dictatorial than relativism, since it has no real reason to impose itself.

As St. Pius X put it, “civilization is not something yet to be found, nor is the New City to be built on hazy notions; it has been in existence and still is: it is Christian civilization, it is the Catholic City. It has only to be set up and restored continually against the unremitting attacks of insane dreamers, rebels and miscreants. OMNIA INSTAURARE IN CHRISTO” [2].

[1] It is no coincidence that this letter was mentioned during a recent polemic in the columns of La Croix on a link between the political right and the claim to Christian civilization. One of the protagonists questioned the reference to a natural law as “powerful idolatry,” and saw the saints and artists of Christianity only as “deconstructors.”
[2] St. Pius X, Notre Charge Apostolique [Our Apostolic Mandate], August 25, 1910.