OL’ S S E RVATOR E ROMANO · ing to his preaching, repented and changed their lives. Let us think...

Price € 1,00. Back issues € 2,00

L’O S S E RVATOR E ROMANOWEEKLY EDITION

Unicuique suum

IN ENGLISHNon praevalebunt

Fifty-third year, number 40 (2.666) Vatican City Friday, 2 October 2020

The Pope announces Apostolic Letter on the memorial of St Jerome

Love of Sacred Scripturethe personal dialogue with God

For the Holy Father’s Apostolic Letter ‘Scripturae Sacrae Affectus’, see pages 7-11

Apostolate of the Sea

Centennial of Stella Maris

PAGE 12

P a ro l i n ’s address to members

Moneyval programme

PAGE 13

On Wednesday morning, 30 September, after the reading of the summaries ofthe General Audience in various languages, the Holy Father announced thatearlier that morning he had signed an Apostolic Letter to coincide with thememorial of the 16th centenary of the death of Saint Jerome.The following is a translation of his words.

Today, I signed the Apostolic Letter “Sacrae Scripturae Affectus”, on the16th centenary of the death of Saint Jerome. May the example of this greatdoctor and father of the Church, who placed the Bible at the centre of hislife, inspire in everyone a renewed love for the Sacred Scripture and thedesire to live in personal dialogue with the Word of God”.

This is the timefor a choice

GeneralAudience

PAGE 3

Introduction to the Letter

Like a “library of Christ”

RAVA S I ON PA G E 6

CONTINUED ON PA G E 5

ANDREA MONDA

The words in the video mes-sage the Pope sent to the Gen-eral Assembly of the UnitedNations are so clear and simplethat they do not need any com-mentary or explanation, butonly to be read attentively andmeditated on through a reflec-tion that leads to concrete ac-tion. Head, heart and hands, touse an image that is dear toBergoglio, must be touchedand involved together in a vir-tuous cycle that spurs mankindto make that “change of direc-tion” that is at the heart of thismessage which at times soundslike an exhortation, almost ac r y.

The global situation, ex-amined with participation andheartfelt meticulousness by theHoly Father in fact, “calls for achange of direction. To achievethis, we already possess the ne-cessary cultural and technolo-gical resources, and socialawareness. This change of dir-ection will require, however, amore robust ethical frameworkcapable of overcoming ‘to day’swidespread and quietly growingculture of waste’”. A few linesearlier the Pope had lingeredon the great technological pro-gress made in the last few yearsthat should serve to make theliving and work conditions ofpeople more dignified and notto contribute instead to theirgreater exploitation. The longdialogue between the then Car-dinal Joseph Ratzinger and thephilosopher Jurgen Habermasin the early years of this cen-tury, comes to mind, in whichthe former highlighted howgreat developments in techno-logy had not been matched byanalogous growth in humanityat an ethical level, as wasdemonstrated for example bynuclear energy, a giganticpower which demands anequally great moral strength. Touse the words of the Englishauthor Tolkien: we are buildinga world of better means forworse ends.

A renewed sense of global co-responsibilityto defeat self harming individualism

To the UN General Assembly the Holy Father calls for a change in direction to emerge from the crisis

In a video message on Friday, 25September, Pope Francis ad-dressed participants in the 75thGeneral Assembly of the UnitedNations. He stressed that this timeof pandemic presents “a choicebetween two possible paths”, andwe must choose the one that“leads to the consolidation ofmultilateralism as the expressionof a renewed sense of globalco-responsibility, a solidaritygrounded in justice and the at-tainment of peace and unity with-in the human family, which isGo d’s plan for our world”. Atthis moment, he said, “it is ourduty to rethink the future of ourcommon home and our commonp ro j e c t ”, and to engage in “afrank and coherent dialogue aimedat strengthening multilateralismand cooperation between states”.

PAGE 4

L’OSSERVATORE ROMANOWEEKLY EDITION

Unicuique suumIN ENGLISHNon praevalebunt

Vatican Cityredazione.inglese.or@sp c.vaw w w. o s s e r v a t o re ro m a n o .v a

ANDREA MONDAEditor-in-Chief

Giuseppe FiorentinoAssistant Editor

Editorial officevia del Pellegrino, 00120 Vatican City

telephone +390669899300, fax +390669883675

TIPO GRAFIA VAT I C A N A EDITRICEL’OS S E R VAT O R E ROMANO

Photo [email protected] w w w. p h o t o .v a

Advertising AgencyIl Sole 24 Ore S.p.A.

System Comunicazione PubblicitariaVia Monte Rosa 91, 20149 Milano

s e g re t e r i a d i re z i o n e s y s t e m @ i l s o l e 2 4 o re . c o m

Subscription rates: Italy - Vatican: € 58.00; Europe: € 100.00 - US$ 148.00 £ 80.00; Latin America, Africa,Asia: € 110.00 - US$ 160.00 - £ 88.00; Oceania, North America: € 162.00 - £ 130.00.Management Office: phone +390669899480; fax +390669885164; e-mail [email protected] India: The weekly English Edition of L'Osservatore Romano is published and distributed inIndia by Carmel International Publishing House, Cotton Hill, Trivandrum- 695 014, Kerala-India;phone: +91471327253, fax: +91471328191, 329934; e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] North America: L’Osservatore Romano (USPS 016-419) is published fifty times per year (weekly, except third week inAugust and last week in December) by Our Sunday Visitor, L’Osservatore Romano, English Edition, 200 Noll Plaza,Huntington, IN 46750. Periodicals Postage Pending at Huntington, IN, and additional mailing offices, USA – phone:800-348-2440 x2171; fax: 866-891-7390 – e-mail: [email protected]: Send address changes to Our Sunday Visitor, 200 Noll Plaza, Huntington, IN 46750

page 2 L’OSSERVATORE ROMANO Friday, 2 October 2020, number 40

VAT I C A N BULLETINFunds collected in US for the Vatican Apostolic Archives

Treasures of History Foundation

God works through generous people even in the midst of a worldpandemic and economic crisis, among other things! Consequently,His Eminence, the Cardinal Archivist José Tolentino de Mend-onça and the Prefect Bishop Sergio Pagano of the VaticanApostolic Archives wish to announce that a Foundation was re-cently established in Atlanta, Georgia, USA, which enjoys a tax-ex-emption status. Its name is the Treasures of History Foundation. Itis comprised of two boards: the Board of Members, who are USPrelates, and the Board of Directors, who are all laypersons exceptfor two Monsignors who serve as CEO and Vice-chair. The Boardof Directors in effect manages the running of the Foundation.

The Foundation is dedicated to collect funds for the VaticanAp ostolic Archives, the Papal Archives, and thereby assist the ven-erable Institution in fulfilling the mission that succeeding Popeshave entrusted to it since its establishment over 400 years ago aspart of the Vatican Apostolic Library. It houses millions of parch-ments and documents, including diplomatic and personal corres-pondence between different Popes and Presidents of the UnitedStates. The Institution is accessed by scholars across the world, ir-re sp ective of their faith.

Tax deductible donations can be made to this Foundation bysending them to:

Treasures of History Foundation, 2722 N Green Valley Pkwy, Unit#50705, Henderson, NV 89014-9997

By October a decision is expected regarding the Vatican proposal to extend the Provisional Agreement ‘ad experimentum’

The Holy See and Chinareasons for Agreement on appointment of bishops

Cardinal Parolin and Archbishop Gallaghermeet Mr Pompeo in the Vatican

The American Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, arrived at the Vaticanon Thursday morning, 1 October, to meet Cardinal Pietro Parolin andArchbishop Paul Richard Gallagher.

Responding to questions from journalists, the Director of the Holy SeePress Office, Mr Matteo Bruni, said: “During this morning’s talksbetween the Secretary of State of the United States of America, MichaelRichard Pompeo, and His Holiness’ Secretary of State, H.E. CardinalPietro Parolin, accompanied by H.E. Archbishop Richard Gallagher, Sec-retary for Relations with States, the parties presented their respective pos-itions regarding relations with the People’s Republic of China, in a re-spectful, relaxed and cordial environment. They also spoke about someareas of conflict and crisis, particularly in the Caucasus, the Middle East,and the Eastern Mediterranean. The meeting lasted about 45 minutes”.

ANDREA TORNIELLI

The Provisional Agreement signedon 22 September 2018 between theHoly See and the People’s Republicof China regarding the appointmentof bishops, which went into effect amonth later, will expire this coming22 October. Signed in Beijing, theterm of the ad experimentum P ro v i -sional Agreement was set for twoyears after which it would eventuallybe definitively confirmed or someother decision reached. Recently,Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro

Parolin explained that the intentionis to propose an extension to theChinese authorities, maintaining theAgreement as provisional, “as donein these first two years, so as to fur-ther verify its usefulness for theChurch in China”. Notwithstandingthe lengthy period of time and diffi-culties, aggravated in the last tenmonths due to the pandemic, Pa-rolin said, “it seems to me that a dir-ection has been marked out that isworth continuing; then we will see”.

From the very first communiqué,jointly published by the Holy Seeand the Chinese government on 22

September 2018, the subject matterof the Agreement itself had beenclearly specified immediately: that itdoes not cover direct diplomatic re-lations between the Holy See andChina, the juridical status of theCatholic Chinese Church, or rela-tions between the clergy and thecountry’s authorities. The Provision-al Agreement exclusively treats theprocess for the appointment of bish-ops: an essential question for the lifeof the Church and for the commu-nion between the pastors of theChinese Catholic Church with theBishop of Rome and with the bish-ops throughout the world. The goalof the Provisional Agreement, there-fore, has never been merely diplo-matic, much less, political, but wasalways genuinely pastoral. Its objec-tive is to permit the Catholic faithfulto have bishops in full communionwith the Successor of Peter who areat the same time recognized by theauthorities of the People’s Republicof China.

Right after the signing of the Pro-visional Agreement, in his Septem-ber 2018 Message to the Catholics ofChina and the Universal Church,Pope Francis recalled that in the lastdecades, wounds and divisions inthe heart of the Catholic Church inChina were “centred especially onthe figure of the bishop as theguardian of the authenticity of thefaith and as guarantor of ecclesial

communion”. The interventions ofpolitical structures on the internallife of the Catholic community hadprovoked the phenomenon of theso-called “u n d e rg ro u n d ” c o m m u n i t y,which sought to remove itself fromthe control of the religious policiesof the government.

Well aware of the wounds inflict-ed on the communion of the Churchcaused by weakness and error, butalso by undue external pressure onpeople, Pope Francis, after years oflengthy negotiations undertaken byhis predecessors, reestablished fullcommunion with Chinese bishopsordained without papal mandate.This decision was taken after reflect-ing, praying and examining each in-dividual personal situation. The solescope of the Provisional Agreement,the Pontiff clarified, is “to supportand advance the preaching of theGospel, and to reestablish and pre-serve the full and visible unity of theCatholic community in China”.

The first two years led to newepiscopal appointments with Rome’sagreement, and some bishops wereofficially recognized by the govern-ment in Beijing. Even though con-tact was blocked in recent monthsdue to the pandemic, the resultshave been positive, although limited,and suggest going forward with theapplication of the Agreement for an-other determined period of time.

AUDIENCES

Thursday, 24 September

H.E. Ms Eunisis Vásquez Acosta, Am-bassador of the Dominican Republic

Archbishop Giacomo Morandi, titularArchbishop of Cerveteri, Secretary ofthe Congregation for the Doctrine ofthe Faith

Archbishop Waldemar Stanisław Som-mertag, titular Archbishop ofMaastricht, Apostolic Nuncio toNicaragua

Friday, 25 September

H.E. Mr Andrzej Duda President of theRepublic of Poland, and entourage

Cardinal Salvatore De Giorgi, Archbish-op emeritus of Palermo, Italy

Members of the Circolo San Pietro

Monday, 28 September

Cardinal Marc Ouellet, PSS, Prefect ofthe Congregation for Bishops

H.E. Ms Alexandra Valkenburg-Roelofs, Ambassador of the EuropeanUnion, on the occasion of the presenta-tion of her credential letters

Archbishop Giovanni d’Aniello, titularArchbishop of Paestum, Apostolic Nun-cio to the Russian Federation

Archbishop Francisco M. Padilla, titularArchbishop of Nebbio, Apostolic Nun-cio to Guatemala

Directors and agents of the Inspectorateof Vatican Public Security, with familymembers, on the occasion of the 75thanniversary of its founding

NECROLO GY

Archbishop John J. Mayers, Archbishopemeritus of Newark, USA, at age 79 (24Sept.)

number 40, Friday, 2 October 2020 L’OSSERVATORE ROMANO page 3

Pope Francis continues his series of catecheses on the need to heal the world

A society with solidarityis much more resistant than any kind of virus

“A fair and equitable society is a healthier society”, and aparticipatory society strengthens communion, Pope Francisstressed at the General Audience on Wednesday morning, 30September. Speaking from the Vatican’s San Damaso courtyard,he continued his series of catecheses on the need to heal the worldin this time of pandemic, and reflected on a passage from theLetter to the Hebrews (12:1-2) and the importance of keeping“our eyes fixed on Jesus, who saves and heals the world”. Thefollowing is a translation of the Holy Father’s catechesis, whichhe delivered in Italian.

Dear Brothers and Sisters,Good morning!In recent weeks we have reflectedtogether, in the light of the Gos-pel, on how to heal the worldthat is suffering from a malaisethat has been highlighted and ac-centuated by the pandemic. Themalaise was already there: thepandemic highlighted it more, itaccentuated it. We have walkedthe paths of d i g n i t y, solidarity ands u b s i d i a r i t y, paths that are essen-tial to promote human dignityand the common good. And as dis-ciples of Jesus, we have proposedto follow in his steps, opting forthe poor, rethinking the use of ma-terial goods and taking care of ourcommon home. In the midst of thepandemic that afflicts us, weanchored ourselves to the prin-ciples of the social doctrine of theC h u rc h , allowing ourselves to beguided by faith, by hope and byc h a r i t y. Here we found solid helpso as to be transformers whodream big, who are not stoppedby the meanness that divides andhurts, but who encourage thegeneration of a new and betterworld.

I would like this journey not toend with my catecheses, butrather that we may be able tocontinue to walk together, to“keep our eyes fixed on Jesus”(cf. Heb 12:2), as we heard at thebeginning; our eyes fixed onJesus, who saves and heals theworld. As the Gospel shows us,Jesus healed the sick of everytype (cf. Mt 9:35), he gave sightto the blind, the word to themute, hearing to the deaf. Andwhen he cured diseases and phys-ical infirmity, he also healed thespirit by forgiving sins, becauseJesus always forgives, as well as“social suffering” by includingthe marginalized (cf. Catechism ofthe Catholic Church, 1421). Jesus,who renews and reconciles everycreature (cf. 2 Cor 5:17; Col 1:19-20), gives us the gifts necessary tolove and heal as he knew how to

do (cf. Lk 10:1-9; Jn 15: 9-17), totake care of all without distinc-tion on the basis of race, lan-guage or nation.

In order for this to really hap-pen, we need to contemplate andappreciate the beauty of everyhuman being and every creature.We were conceived in the heartof God (cf. Eph 1:3-5). “Each ofus is the result of a thought ofGod. Each of us is willed, eachof us is loved, each of us is ne-cessary” (Benedict XVI, Homily forthe beginning of the Petrine ministry,24 April 2005; Encyclical LaudatoSi’, 65). Furthermore, everycreature has something to say tous about God the creator (cf. En-cyclical Laudato Si’, 69, 239). Ac-knowledging this truth and giv-ing thanks for the intimate bondsin our universal communion withall people and all creatures activ-ates “generous care, full of ten-derness” (ibid., 220). And it alsohelps us to recognize Christpresent in our poor and sufferingbrothers and sisters, to encounterthem and to listen to their cryand the cry of the earth thatechoes it (cf. ibid., 49).

Inwardly mobilized by thesecries that demand of us anothercourse (cf. ibid., 53), that demandchange, we will be able to con-tribute to the restoration of rela-tions with our gifts and capacities(cf. ibid., 19). We will be able toregenerate society and not returnto so-called “normality”, which isan ailing normality, indeed whichwas ailing before the pandemic:the pandemic highlighted it!“Now we return to normality”:no, this will not do, because thisnormality was sick with injustice,inequality and environmentaldegradation. The normality towhich we are called is that of theKingdom of God, where “theblind receive their sight and thelame walk, lepers are cleansed,and the deaf hear, and the deadare raised up and the poor havegood news preached to them”(Mt 11:5). And nobody plays

dumb by looking the other way.This is what we have to do in or-der to change. In the normalityof the Kingdom of God, there isbread for all and more to spare,social organization is based oncontributing, sharing and distrib-uting, not on possessing, exclud-ing and accumulating (cf. Mt14:13-21).

The gesture that enables pro-gress in a society, a family, aneighbourhood, or a city, every-one, is to give oneself, to give,which is not giving alms, but is agiving of self that comes from theheart. A gesture that distances usfrom selfishness and the anxietyof possessing. But the Christianway of doing this is not a mech-anical way: it is a human way. Wewill never be able to emerge fromthe crisis that was highlighted bythe pandemic, mechanically, withnew tools — which are very im-portant, they allow us to moveforward, and we must not beafraid of them — but knowingthat even the most sophisticatedmeans, capable of doing manythings, are incapable of onething: tenderness. And tendernessis the very sign of Jesus’ p re s e n c e .Approaching others in order towalk [together], to heal, to help,to sacrifice oneself for others.

Thus, that normality of theKingdom of God is important:that bread may reach everyone,that social organization be basedon contributing, sharing and dis-tributing, with tenderness; not onpossessing, excluding and accu-mulating. Because at the end oflife, we will not take anythingwith us into the other life!

A small virus continues tocause deep wounds and to exposeour physical, social and spiritualvulnerabilities. It has laid barethe great inequality that reigns inthe world: inequality of oppor-tunity, of goods, of access tohealth care, of technology, educa-tion: millions of children cannotgo to school, and so the list goes

on. These injustices are neithernatural nor inevitable. They arethe work of man, they come froma model of growth detached fromthe deepest values. The waste ofleftover food: with that waste onecan feed everyone. And this hasmade many people lose hope andhas increased uncertainty and an-guish. This is why, to emergefrom the pandemic, we must findthe cure not only for thecoronavirus — which is important!— but also for the great humanand socio-economic viruses. Theymust not be concealed by white-washing them so that they cannotbe seen. And certainly we cannotexpect the economic model thatunderlies unfair and unsustainabledevelopment to solve our prob-lems. It has not and will not doso, because it cannot do so, eventhough some false prophets con-tinue to promise the “trickle-down effect” that never comes(“Trickle-down effect” in English,“d e r ra m e ” in Spanish (cf. Apostol-ic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium,54). You yourselves have heardthe theory of the glass: the im-portant thing is that the glass be-come full and then overflow tothe poor and to others, and theyreceive wealth. But there is a phe-nomenon: the glass begins to fillup and when it is almost full itgrows, it grows and grows, andthe trickling down never happens.We must be careful.

We need to set to work urgentlyto generate good policies, todesign systems of social organiza-tion that reward participation, careand generosity, rather than indif-ference, exploitation and particu-lar interests. We must go aheadwith tenderness. A fair and equit-able society is a healthier society.A participatory society — w h e rethe “last” are taken into account

GENERAL AU D I E N C E



To the UN General Assembly the Pope calls for a change in direction and multilateralism to emerge from the crisis

A renewed global co-responsibilityto defeat self harming individualism

In order to emerge from the crisis, we must defeat the temptation to fall back onself harming attitudes such as nationalism and individualism, and take the pathof multilateralism which leads to a “renewed sense of global co-responsibility”,Pope Francis said in a video message on Friday, 25 September, addressed toparticipants in the ongoing 75th General Assembly of the United Nations. Thefollowing is the English text of the Holy Father’s message, which he delivered inSpanish.

Mr. President,Peace be with all of you!I offer cordial greetings to you, MrPresident, and to all the Delegationstaking part in this significant Sev-enty-fifth Session of the United Na-tions’ General Assembly. In particu-lar, I greet the Secretary General,Mr António Guterres, the participat-ing Heads of State and Govern-ment, and all those who are follow-ing the General Debate.

The seventy-fifth anniversary ofthe United Nations offers me a fit-ting occasion to express once againthe Holy See’s desire that this Or-ganization increasingly serve as asign of unity between States and aninstrument of service to the entirehuman family.1

In these days, our world continuesto be impacted by the Covid-19 pan-demic, which has led to the loss ofso many lives. This crisis is changingour way of life, calling into questionour economic, health and social sys-tems, and exposing our human fra-g i l i t y.

The pandemic, indeed, calls us“to seize this time of trial as a timeof choosing, a time to choose whatmatters and what passes away, atime to separate what is necessaryfrom what is not”.2 It can representa concrete opportunity for conver-sion, for transformation, for rethink-ing our way of life and our econom-ic and social systems, which arewidening the gap between rich andpoor based on an unjust distributionof resources. On the other hand, thepandemic can be the occasion for a“defensive retreat” into greater indi-vidualism and elitism.

We are faced, then, with a choicebetween two possible paths. Onepath leads to the consolidation ofmultilateralism as the expression ofa renewed sense of global co-re-sponsibility, a solidarity grounded injustice and the attainment of peaceand unity within the human family,which is God’s plan for our world.The other path emphasizes self-suffi-ciency, nationalism, protectionism,individualism and isolation; it ex-cludes the poor, the vulnerable andthose dwelling on the peripheries oflife. That path would certainly bedetrimental to the whole community,causing self-inflicted wounds oneveryone. It must not prevail.

The pandemic has highlighted theurgent need to promote publichealth and to make every person’sright to basic medical care a reality.3

For this reason, I renew my appealto political leaders and the privatesector to spare no effort to ensureaccess to Covid-19 vaccines and tothe essential technologies needed to

care for the sick. If anyone shouldbe given preference, let it be thepoorest, the most vulnerable, thosewho so often experience discrimina-tion because they have neither pow-er nor economic resources.

The current crisis has also demon-strated that solidarity must not bean empty word or promise. It hasalso shown us the importance ofavoiding every temptation to exceedour natural limits. “We have the free-dom needed to limit and direct tech-nology; we can put it at the serviceof another type of progress, onewhich is healthier, more human,more social, more integral”.4 Thisalso needs to be taken into carefulconsideration in discussions on thecomplex issue of artificial intelli-gence (AI).

Along these same lines, I think ofthe effects of the pandemic on em-ployment, a sector already destabil-ized by a labour market driven byincreasing uncertainty and wide-spread robotization. There is an ur-gent need to find new forms of worktruly capable of fulfilling our humanpotential and affirming our dignity.In order to ensure dignified employ-ment, there must be a change in theprevailing economic paradigm,which seeks only to expand compa-nies’ profits. Offering jobs to morepeople should be one of the mainobjectives of every business, one ofthe criteria for the success of pro-ductive activity. Technological pro-gress is valuable and necessary,provided that it serves to makep eople’s work more dignified andsafe, less burdensome and stressful.

All this calls for a change of direc-tion. To achieve this, we alreadypossess the necessary cultural andtechnological resources, and socialawareness. This change of directionwill require, however, a more robustethical framework capable of over-coming “to day’s widespread andquietly growing culture of waste”.5

At the origin of this “t h ro w a w a yc u l t u re ” is a gross lack of respect forhuman dignity, the promotion ofideologies with reductive under-standings of the human person, adenial of the universality of funda-mental human rights, and a cravingfor absolute power and control thatis widespread in today’s society. Letus name this for what it is: an attackagainst humanity itself.

It is in fact painful to see thenumber of fundamental humanrights that in our day continue to beviolated with impunity. The list ofsuch violations is indeed lengthy,and offers us a frightening picture ofa humanity abused, wounded, de-prived of dignity, freedom and hope

for the future. As part of this pic-ture, religious believers continue toendure every kind of persecution, in-cluding genocide, because of theirbeliefs. We Christians too are vic-tims of this: how many of our broth-ers and sisters throughout the worldare suffering, forced at times to fleefrom their ancestral lands, cut offfrom their rich history and culture.

We should also admit that hu-manitarian crises have become thestatus quo, in which people’s right tolife, liberty and personal security arenot protected. Indeed, as shown byconflicts worldwide, the use of ex-plosive weapons, especially in popu-lated areas, is having a dramaticlong-term humanitarian impact.Conventional weapons are becomingless and less “conventional” andmore and more “weapons of massd e s t ru c t i o n ”, wreaking havoc oncities, schools, hospitals, religioussites, infrastructures and basic ser-vices needed by the population.

What is more, great numbers ofpeople are being forced to leavetheir homes. Refugees, migrants andthe internally displaced frequentlyfind themselves abandoned in theircountries of origin, transit and des-tination, deprived of any chance tobetter their situation in life and thatof their families. Worse still, thou-sands are intercepted at sea and for-cibly returned to detention camps,where they meet with torture andabuse. Many of these become vic-tims of human trafficking, sexualslavery or forced labour, exploited indegrading jobs and denied a justwage. This is intolerable, yet inten-tionally ignored by many!

The numerous and significant in-ternational efforts to respond tothese crises begin with great promise— here I think of the two GlobalCompacts on Refugees and on Mi-gration — yet many lack the neces-sary political support to prove suc-cessful. Others fail because individu-al states shirk their responsibilitiesand commitments. All the same, thecurrent crisis offers an opportunityfor the United Nations to help builda more fraternal and compassionateso ciety.

This includes reconsidering therole of economic and financial insti-tutions, like that of Bretton-Woods,which must respond to the rapidlygrowing inequality between the su-per-rich and the permanently poor.An economic model that encourages

subsidiarity, supports economic de-velopment at the local level and in-vests in education and infrastructurebenefiting local communities, willlay the foundation not only for eco-nomic success but also for the re-newal of the larger community andnation. Here I would renew my ap-peal that “in light of the present cir-cumstances … all nations be enabledto meet the greatest needs of themoment through the reduction, ifnot the forgiveness, of the debt bur-dening the balance sheets of thepoorest nations”.6

The international communityought to make every effort to put anend to economic injustices. “Whenmultilateral credit organizations pro-vide advice to various nations, it isimportant to keep in mind the loftyconcepts of fiscal justice, the publicbudgets responsible for their in-debtedness and, above all, an effec-tive promotion of the poorest, whichmakes them protagonists in the so-cial network”.7 We have a resp onsi-bility to offer development assistanceto poor nations and debt relief tohighly indebted nations.8

“A new ethics presupposes beingaware of the need for everyone towork together to close tax shelters,avoid evasions and money launder-ing that rob society, as well as tospeak to nations about the imp or-tance of defending justice and thecommon good over the interests ofthe most powerful companies andmultinationals”9. Now is a fittingtime to renew the architecture of in-ternational finance.10

Mr. President,Five years ago, I had the oppor-

tunity to address the General As-sembly in person on its seventiethanniversary. My visit took place at atime marked by truly dynamic multi-lateralism. It was a moment of greathope and promise for the interna-tional community, on the eve of theadoption of the 2030 Agenda forSustainable Development. Somemonths later, the Paris Agreementon Climate Change was also adop-ted.

Yet we must honestly admit that,even though some progress has beenmade, the international communityhas shown itself largely incapable ofhonouring the promises made fiveyears ago. I can only reiterate that“we must avoid every temptation tofall into a declarationist nominalism


Fr a n c i s ’ video message to the UN General Assemblywhich would assuage our con-sciences. We need to ensure that ourinstitutions are truly effective in thestruggle against all these scourges”.11

I think of the alarming situationin the Amazon and its indigenouspeoples. Here we see that the envi-ro n mental crisis is inseparably linkedto a social crisis, and that caring forthe environment calls for an integ-rated approach to combatting pover-ty and exclusion.12

To be sure, the growth of an in-tegral ecological sensitivity and thedesire for action is a positive step.“We must not place the burden onthe next generations to take on theproblems caused by the previous

ones… We must seriously askourselves if there is the political willto allocate with honesty, responsibil-ity and courage, more human, finan-cial and technological resources tomitigate the negative effects of cli-mate change, as well as to help thepoorest and most vulnerable popula-tions who suffer from them themost”.13 The Holy See will continueto play its part. As a concrete signof the Holy See’s commitment tocare for our common home, I re-cently ratified the Kigali Amend-ment to the Montreal Protocol.14

Mr. President,We cannot fail to acknowledge

the devastating effects of the Covid-19 crisis on children, including unac-companied young migrants andrefugees. Violence against children,including the horrible scourge ofchild abuse and pornography, hasalso dramatically increased.

Millions of children are presentlyunable to return to school. In manyparts of the world, this situationrisks leading to an increase in childlabour, exploitation, abuse and mal-nutrition. Sad to say, some countriesand international institutions arealso promoting abortion as one ofthe so-called “essential services”provided in the humanitarian re-sponse to the pandemic. It is troub-ling to see how simple and conve-nient it has become for some todeny the existence of a human lifeas a solution to problems that canand must be solved for both themother and her unborn child.

I urge civil authorities to be espe-cially attentive to children who aredenied their fundamental rights anddignity, particularly their right to lifeand to schooling. I cannot help butthink of the appeal of that cour-ageous young woman, MalalaYousafzai, who speaking five yearsago in the General Assembly, re-minded us that “one child, oneteacher, one book and one pen canchange the world”.

The first teachers of every childare his or her mother and father, thefamily, which the Universal Declara-tion of Human Rights describes asthe “natural and fundamental groupunit of society”.15 All too often, thefamily is the victim of forms of ideo-logical colonialism that weaken itand end up producing in many ofits members, especially the most vul-nerable, the young and the elderly, afeeling of being orphaned and lack-ing roots. The breakdown of thefamily is reflected in the social frag-mentation that hinders our efforts toconfront common enemies. It is timethat we reassess and recommit our-selves to achieving our goals.

One such goal is the advancementof women. This year marks thetwenty-fifth anniversary of theBeijing Conference on Women. Atevery level of society, women nowplay an important role, offering theirsingular contribution and cour-ageously promoting the commongood. Many women, however, con-tinue to be left behind: victims ofslavery, trafficking, violence, exploi-tation and degrading treatment. Tothem, and to those who are forced

to live apart from their families, Iexpress my fraternal closeness. Atthe same time, I appeal once morefor greater determination and com-mitment in the fight against thoseheinous practices that debase notonly women, but all humanity,which by its silence and lack of ef-fective action becomes an accom-plice in them.

Mr. President,We must ask ourselves if the prin-

cipal threats to peace and security —poverty, epidemics, terrorism and somany others — can be effectivelycountered when the arms race, in-cluding nuclear weapons, continuesto squander precious resources thatcould better be used to benefit theintegral development of peoples andprotect the natural environment.

We need to break with the presentclimate of distrust. At present, weare witnessing an erosion of multilat-eralism, which is all the more seriousin light of the development of newforms of military technology,16 suchas lethal autonomous weapons sys-tems (L AW S ) which irreversibly alterthe nature of warfare, detaching itfurther from human agency.

We need to dismantle the perverselogic that links personal and nation-al security to the possession ofweaponry. This logic serves only toincrease the profits of the arms in-dustry, while fostering a climate ofdistrust and fear between personsand peoples.

Nuclear deterrence, in particular,creates an ethos of fear based on thethreat of mutual annihilation; in thisway, it ends up poisoning relation-ships between peoples and obstruct-ing dialogue.17 That is why it is soimportant to support the principalinternational legal instruments onnuclear disarmament, non-prolifera-tion and prohibition. The Holy Seetrusts that the forthcoming ReviewConference of the Parties to theTreaty on the Non-Proliferation ofNuclear Weapons (NPT) will resultin concrete action in accordance

with our joint intention “to achieveat the earliest possible date the ces-sation of the nuclear arms race andto undertake effective measures inthe direction of nuclear disarma-ment”.18

In addition, our strife-riddenworld needs the United Nations tobecome an ever more effective inter-national workshop for peace. Thismeans that the members of the Se-curity Council, especially the Per-manent Members, must act withgreater unity and determination. Inthis regard, the recent adoption of aglobal cease-fire during the presentcrisis is a very noble step, one thatdemands good will on the part of allfor its continued implementation.Here I would also reiterate the im-portance of relaxing internationalsanctions that make it difficult forstates to provide adequate supportfor their citizens.

Mr. President,We never emerge from a crisis just

as we were. We come out either bet-ter or worse. This is why, at this crit-ical juncture, it is our duty to rethinkthe future of our common home andour common project. A complex tasklies before us, one that requires afrank and coherent dialogue aimedat strengthening multilateralism andcooperation between states. Thepresent crisis has further demon-strated the limits of our self-suffi-ciency as well as our common vul-nerability. It has forced us to thinkclearly about how we want to emergefrom this: either better or worse.

The pandemic has shown us thatwe cannot live without one another,or worse still, pitted against one an-other. The United Nations was es-tablished to bring nations together,to be a bridge between peoples. Letus make good use of this institutionin order to transform the challengethat lies before us into an opp ortu-nity to build together, once more,the future we all desire.

God bless you all!Thank you, Mr. President

1 Address to the General Assembly of the United Nations, 25 September 2015;BENEDICT XVI, Address to the General Assembly of the United Nations, 18April 2008.2 Meditation during the Ext ra o rdinary Moment of Prayer in the Time of Pan-demic, 27 March 2020.3 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 25.14 Encyclical Letter Laudato Si’, 112.5 Address to the General Assembly of the United Nations Organization, 25September 2015.6 Urbi et Orbi Message, 12 April 2020.7 Address to the Participants in the Seminar “New Forms of Solidarity”, 5 Fe-bruary 2020.8 Ibid.9 Ibid.10 Cf. Ibid.11 Address to the General Assembly of the United Nations Organization, 25September 2015.12 Encyclical Letter Laudato Si’, 139.13 Message to the Participants in the Twenty-fifth Session of the Conference ofStates Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on ClimateChange, 1 December 2019.14 Message to the Thirty-first Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol, 7November 2019.15 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 16.3.16 Address on Nuclear Weapons, Atomic Bomb Hypocenter Park, Nagasaki, 24November 2019.17 Ibid.18 Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, Preamble.

This is the timefor a choice

As it lists the problems afflict-ing humanity today across all thecontinents, offering examples, thePop e’s message puts the prioritiesback in order, reflecting on theends and therefore on the means,stressing the centrality of the dig-nity of men and women and thedefence of those fundamental hu-man rights that are still very oftenbreached. The message tacklesmany themes and issues: from ac-cess to a Covid-19 vaccine to theerosion of multilateralism, fromthe challenge of the frontier of ar-tificial intelligence to faith basedpersecutions, from humanitariancrises to the problem of internallydisplaced people, from debt re-mission to the demand for an endto tax havens, from the Amazonand the environmental issue tothe condition of children, fromthe plague of abortion to the pro-motion of the family that is sub-jected to forms of ideological col-onization, from the condition ofwomen to the urgency of nucleardisarmament, but the heart of thediscourse is the theme of decision.

The current time, marked bythe crisis of the pandemic is, forthe Pope, the time for a choice:“We are faced, then, with achoice between two possiblepaths. One path leads to the con-solidation of multilateralism asthe expression of a renewed senseof global co-responsibility, asolidarity grounded in justice andthe attainment of peace and unitywithin the human family, which isGo d’s plan for our world. Theother path emphasizes self-suffi-ciency, nationalism, protection-ism, individualism and isolation;it excludes the poor, the vulner-able and those dwelling on theperipheries of life. That pathwould certainly be detrimental tothe whole community, causingself-inflicted wounds on everyone.It must not prevail”. These areclear, simple words that need nocommentary but rather listening.

A. MONDA

CONTINUED FROM PA G E 1


Apostolic Letter ‘Scripturae Sacrae Affectus’

C a rd i n a l GIANFRANCO RAVA S I

It was 30 September 420 inBethlehem, near the cave ofChrist’s Nativity; Jerome theDalmatian was closing hisearthly existence, the plot

line of which had been particularlyvaried and even tormented. Exactly1600 years after that autumn dayPope Francis wished to dedicate anextensive and intense Apostolic Let-ter to him, which constitutes thesubstance of this small volume. Thetitle, Scripturae Sacrae Affectus, de-rived from the Saint’s memorialliturgy, represents an extraordinarysynthesis of his personal experienceand his works, indeed, almost anemblematic banner of one who is re-membered by all as the translatorpar excellence of the Bible throughthe Vu l g a t e which has spanned thecenturies.

For this very reason his figure hasbeen a capital point of reference forthe history of western culture andeven for art, and it is truly surpris-ing that the Pope himself wished toevoke several “sapiential” artisticportraits, beginning from the“touching masterpiece” of the panelof the penitent Jerome in the wilder-ness that Leonardo da Vinci paintedcirca 1482 and which had a romanticstoryline. Even the last hours livedby the Saint were represented by themajestic altarpiece in whichDomenichino, between 1611 and1614, focused on the extreme Com-munion of St Jerome, a work held,like the other, in the Vatican Pin-acoteca. In a hieratic atmosphere thelegendary “Lion of Bethlehem”, bynow debilitated, receives the Euchar-ist surrounded by his disciples andby the faithful Paula, witnesses ofthe monastic communities he foun-ded.

The Apostolic Letter is a veritablehistorical-theological portrait of thispassionate expert on the Word ofGod; it is a guide to follow his vastexegetic and spiritual work; it is anappeal to follow in his footsteps,“loving what he loved”. The clarityof the dictation and structure of thepapal text is such that it requires nocommentary, but only an attentivereading: each page is inlaid withhighly suggestive citations derivedfrom Jerome’s writings. For this reas-on it is truly possible to almost hearhis voice, with the range of tones, ofaccents, of the same sentiments ofsuch a strong character and the typ-ical features of biblical prophetswith their vehemence and passion.

The complex sequence of bio-graphical events distributed primar-ily between Rome and the HolyLand are reconstructed in a carefulyet lively way, beginning with thefamous Lenten turning point in 375which we too wish to recall.Numbed by a fever, a sort of vision

had opened in his mind. Standingbefore the divine Judge, “questionedabout my state, I responded that Iwas a Christian. But the Judge re-torted: ‘You lie! You are a Ciceroni-an, not a Christian’”. This is howthe Saint recounted the great turn-ing point of his life in Letter 22 ofthe traditional catalogue, addressedto the faithful disciple Eustochium.

In another letter, he wrote: “Ibetook myself to a brother who be-fore his conversion had been a Jewand asked him to teach me Hebrew.Thus, after having familiarised my-self with the pointedness of Quintili-an, the fluency of Cicero, the seri-ousness of Fronto and the gentlenessof Pliny, I began to learn my lettersanew and to study to pronouncewords both harsh and guttural.What labour I spent upon this task,what difficulties I went through,how often I despaired, how often Igave over and then in my eagernessto learn commenced again, can beattested both by myself the subjectof this misery and by those whothen lived with me”. Thus began thegreat adventure that becamerenowned with the name Vu l g a t e , thedevelopment of a “p opular” Latintranslation of the Bible.

The Pope follows from that mo-ment the entire itinerary, throughcertain fascinating and movingverses, of the Christian experience ofJerome, whose heart lies in love forSacred Scripture which he faces inits twofold dimension of “letter” and“spirit”. The fundamental axis of hishuman and spiritual journey lies inhis work as a translator, indeed em-bodied in the Vu l g a t e , “the sweetestfruit of the arduous sowing” of hisliterary and historical-critical studies.Pope Francis offers in this regardnot only a series of valuable annota-tions on the significance of this workin its basic characteristics, but also

on the ecclesial importance it re-cords. Above all it captures thehighly original soul that is also atthe root of every qualified transla-tion that continues even today to berevealed through the endless ver-sions of the Bible in the most di-verse languages.

To translate, in fact, is an act ofinculturation and, to this point, ex-plicitly recovering a meaningful re-flection developed from contempor-ary thought (P. Ricoeur, L. Wittgen-stein, G. Steiner), the Pope estab-lishes “that an analogy existsbetween translation as an act of “lin-guistic” hospitality and other formsof hospitality. This is why translationdoes not concern language alone butreally reflects a broader ethical de-cision connected with an entire ap-proach to life. Without translation,different linguistic communitieswould be unable to communicateamong themselves; we would closethe doors of history to one anotherand negate the possibility of build-ing a culture of encounter. In effect,without translation there can be nosuch hospitality; indeed hostilitywould increase. A translator is abridge builder. How many hastyjudgments are made, how many con-demnations and conflicts arise fromthe fact that we do not understandthe language of other persons andfail to apply ourselves, with firmhope, to the endless demonstrationof love that translation represents.”

With all the critical reservations,often understandable consideringthe different chronological and cul-tural coordinates and our differentphilological sensitivity, the Vu l g a t econstituted not only a literary monu-ment to late Latin, but it shaped thetheological language of WesternChristians. In truth success came toJ e ro m e ’s work only a couple of cen-turies later. It was Saint Gregory the

Great, Pope from 590 to 605, whoused Jerome’s translation for his ex-egetic and spiritual writings, fol-lowed by his near contemporaryIsidore of Seville and the VenerableBede, who died in 735. The river ofcopies grew drastically, draggingwith it all kinds of debris, that is,scribal errors, intentional mutations,marginal variations, contaminationwith other ancient Latin versions.Then revision and codification workwas required, giving rise to veritabletextual typologies represented byfamilies of codes, conventionallygrouped according to geographicala re a s .

Thus was born the so-called“Italian” model, named from theVu l g a t e ’s primary sphere of dissemin-ation: it must not be forgotten thatthe sixth century historian and theo-logian Cassiodorus, along with SaintGregory, crafted the adoption ofJ e ro m e ’s version for reading andstudying the Bible within his Vivari-um, the “university” he founded inhis lands of Squillace in Calabria.There was a “Gaelic” typ ologylinked to Alcuin, entrusted with thiswork by Charles the Great (8th-9thcenturies); other models appeared inSpain and Ireland. It is not neces-sary for our purposes to outline theprofile of this branched delta wherethe river of the Vu l g a t e landed, norto describe the revisions made byvarious people, such as for exampleSaint Peter Damian and Lanfrancodi Pavia in the 11th century. Themost widespread text that followedits path in the centuries that fol-lowed until the Renaissance was theso-called Biblia Parisiensis, in use atthe University of Paris, however oneof the least perfect forms in the longlife of the Vu l g a t e .

It was only in the Council ofTrent that, after the authenticity ofthe Vu l g a t e was affirmed as the offi-cial biblical text of the CatholicChurch (8 April 1546) — on whosespecific value the Apostolic Letteroffers an essential and precise indic-ation — that the vote for a more rig-orous “typical edition” was ex-pressed. The guidance of the Coun-cil Fathers was fulfilled only on 9November 1592, after difficult eventsthat involved five Popes (Pius I V, Pi-us V, Sixtus V, Gregory X I V, ClementVIII). The definitive edition was thenpublished with the title Biblia SacraVulgatae editionis Sixti Quinti Pont.iussu recognita atque edita. In the1604 Lyons edition the name ofClement VIII was also added, andhenceforth the “Sixtus-ClementineBible” was spoken of. In subsequentcenturies revisions were constant un-til the proposed detail of the NovaVu l g a t a promulgated by Saint JohnPaul II in 1979 and explicitly cited inthe Letter.


Like a “library of Christ”Introduction to the Document


“Scripturae Sacrae Affectus”Apostolic Letter of the Holy Father on the sixteen hundredth anniversary of the death of Saint Jerome

APOSTOLIC LETTERSCRIPTURAE SACRAE AFFECTUS

OF THE HO LY FAT H E R FRANCISON THE SIXTEEN HUNDREDTH ANNIVERSARY OF

THE DE AT H OF SAINT JEROME

Devotion to sacred Scripture, a “living and tenderlove” for the written word of God: this is the leg-acy that Saint Jerome bequeathed to the Churchby his life and labours. Now, on the sixteen hun-dredth anniversary of his death, those wordstaken from the opening prayer of his liturgicalMemorial1 give us an essential insight into thisoutstanding figure in the Church’s history and hisimmense love for Christ. That “living and tenderlove” flowed, like a great river feeding countlessstreams, into his tireless activity as a scholar,translator and exegete. Jerome’s profound know-ledge of the Scriptures, his zeal for making theirteaching known, his skill as an interpreter oftexts, his ardent and at times impetuous defenceof Christian truth, his asceticism and harsh erem-itical discipline, his expertise as a generous andsensitive spiritual guide — all these make him, six-teen centuries after his death, a figure of enduringrelevance for us, the Christians of the twenty-firstc e n t u r y.

Intro ductionOn 30 September 420, Saint Jerome died in

Bethlehem, in the community that he had foun-ded near the grotto of the Nativity. He thus en-trusted himself to the Lord whom he had alwayssought and known in the Scriptures, the sameLord whom, as a Judge, he had already en-countered in a feverish dream, possibly duringthe Lenten season of 375. That dream proved tobe a decisive turning point in his life, an occasionof conversion and change in outlook. He sawhimself dragged before the Judge. As he himselfrecalled: “Questioned about my state, I respon-ded that I was a Christian. But the Judge retor-ted: ‘You lie! You are a Ciceronian, not a Christi-an’”.2 Jerome had loved from his youth the limpidbeauty of the Latin classics, whereas the writingsof the Bible had initially struck him as uncouthand ungrammatical, too harsh for his refined liter-ary taste.

That experience inspired Jerome to devote him-self entirely to Christ and his word, and to strivethrough his translations and commentaries tomake the divine writings increasingly accessible toothers. It gave his life a new and more decisiveorientation: he was to become a servant of theword of God, in love, as it were, with the “fleshof Scripture”. Thus, in the pursuit of knowledgethat marked his entire life, he put to good use hisyouthful studies and Roman education, redirect-ing his scholarship to the greater service of Godand the ecclesial community.

As a result, Saint Jerome became one of thegreat figures of the ancient Church in the periodknown as the golden age of patristics. He servedas a bridge between East and West. A youthfulfriend of Rufinus of Aquileia, he knew Ambroseand was frequently in correspondence with Au-gustine. In the East, he knew Gregory of Nazian-zus, Didymus the Blind and Epiphanius of Sala-

mis. The Christian iconographic traditionpresents him, in the company of Augustine, Am-brose and Gregory the Great, as one of the fourgreat Doctors of the Western Church.

My predecessors have honoured Saint Jeromeon various occasions. A century ago, on the fif-teenth centenary of his death, Benedict XV dedic-ated his Encyclical Letter Spiritus Paraclitus (15September 1920) to Jerome, presenting him to theworld as “doctor maximus explanandis Scripturis”3.

More recently, Benedict XVI devoted two success-ive catecheses to his person and works.4 Now onthe 1600th anniversary of his death, I too desireto commemorate Saint Jerome and to emphasizeonce more the timeliness of his message andteachings, beginning with his immense love forthe Scriptures.

Indeed, as a sure guide and authoritative wit-ness, Jerome in some sense dominated both theXII Assembly of the Synod of Bishops devotedto the Word of God,5 and the Apostolic Exhorta-tion Verbum Domini of my predecessor BenedictXVI, published on the feast day of the Saint, 30September 2010.6

From Rome to BethlehemThe journey of Saint Jerome’s life traversed the

roads of the Roman Empire between Europe andthe East. Born around 345 in Stridon, on the bor-der between Dalmatia and Pannonia, in present-day Croatia and Slovenia, he received a solid up-bringing in a Christian family. As was the customin those times, he was baptized as an adult some-time between 358 and 364, while studying rhetoricin Rome. During his Roman sojourn, he becamean insatiable reader of the Latin classics, studyingunder the most celebrated teachers of rhetoricthen living.

Following his studies, he undertook a longjourney through Gaul, which brought him to theimperial city of Trier, now in Germany. There hefirst encountered Eastern monasticism as dissem-inated by Saint Athanasius. The result was a deepand enduring desire for that experience, whichled him to Aquileia, where, with a few of hisfriends, “a choir of the blessed”,7 he inaugurated aperiod of life in common.

Around the year 374, passing through Antioch,he decided to retire to the desert of Chalcis, inorder to realize in an ever more radical manner anascetical life in which great space was reserved forthe study of the biblical languages, first Greekand then Hebrew. He studied under a Christian-ized Jew who introduced him to the knowledgeof Hebrew and its sounds, which he found “harshand aspirate”.8

Jerome consciously chose the desert and the er-emitic life for their deeper meaning as a locus offundamental existential decisions, of closenessand encounter with God. There, through contem-plation, interior trials and spiritual combat, hecame to understand more fully his own weakness,his own limits and those of others. There too, hediscovered the importance of tears.9 The deserttaught him sensitivity to God’s presence, our ne-cessary dependence on him and the consolationsborn of his mercy. Here, I am reminded of anapocryphal story in which Jerome asks the Lord:“What do you want of me?” To which Christreplies: “You have not yet given me everything”.“But Lord, I have given you all sorts of things”.“One thing you have not given me”. “What isthat?” “Give me your sins, so that I may rejoicein forgiving them once more”.10

We then find him in Antioch, where he was or-dained a priest by the bishop of that city, Paul-inus, and later, about 379, in Constantinople,where he met Gregory of Nazianzus and contin-ued his studies. He translated from Greek intoLatin several important works (the homilies ofOrigen and the Chronicle of Eusebius) and was

present for the Council celebrated there in 381.Those years of study revealed his generous enthu-siasm and a blessed thirst for knowledge thatmade him tireless and passionate in his work. Ashe put it: “From time to time I despaired; often Igave up, but then I went back out of a stubbornwill to learn”. The “bitter seed” of his studies wasto produce “savoury fruits”.11

In 382, Jerome returned to Rome and placedhimself at the service of Pope Damasus who, ap-preciating his outstanding gifts, made him one ofhis close associates. There Jerome engaged in aconstant activity, without however neglecting spir-itual matters. On the Aventine, supported by aris-tocratic Roman women intent on a radically evan-gelical life, like Marcella, Paula and her daughterEustochium, he created a cenacle devoted to thereading and the rigorous study of Scripture.Jerome acted as exegete, teacher and spiritualguide. At this time, he undertook a revision ofthe earlier Latin translations of the Gospels andperhaps other parts of the New Testament as well.He continued his work of translating Origen’shomilies and biblical commentaries, engaged in aflurry of letter writing, publically refuted hereticalwriters, at times intemperately but always movedby the sincere desire to defend the true faith andthe deposit of Scripture.

This intense and productive period was inter-rupted by the death of Pope Damasus. Jeromefound himself forced to leave Rome and, followedby friends and some women desirous of continu-ing the experience of spiritual life and biblicalstudy already begun, left for Egypt, where he metthe great theologian Didymus the Blind. He thentravelled to Palestine and in 386 settled definit-ively in Bethlehem. He resumed his study of thebiblical texts, texts now anchored in the veryplaces of which they spoke.

The importance he attributed to the holyplaces is seen not only by his decision to live inPalestine from 386 until his death, but also by theassistance he gave to pilgrims. In Bethlehem, aplace close to his heart, he founded in the en-virons of the grotto of the Nativity, “twin” monas-teries, male and female, with hospices to providelodging for pilgrims to the holy places. This wasyet another sign of his generosity, for he made itpossible for many others to see and touch the


Saint Jerome, Albrecht Dürer (1521)



places of salvation history, and to find both cul-tural and spiritual enrichment.12

In his attentive listening to the Scriptures,Jerome came to know himself and to find the faceof God and of his brothers and sisters. He wasalso confirmed in his attraction to community life.His desire to live with friends, as he had inAquileia, led him to establish monastic com-munities in order to pursue the cenobitic ideal ofreligious life. There, the monastery is seen as a“palaestra” for training men and women “whoconsider themselves least of all, in order to befirst among all”, content with poverty and capableof teaching others by their own style of life.Jerome considered it a formative experience tolive “under the governance of a single superiorand in the company of many” in order to learnhumility, patience, silence and meekness, in theawareness that “the truth does not love darkcorners and does not seek grumblers”.13 He alsoconfessed that he “yearned for the close cells ofthe monastery” and “desired the eagerness ofants, where all work together, nothing belongs toany individual, and everything belongs to every-one”.14

Jerome saw his studies not as a pleasant pas-time and an end unto itself, but rather as a spir-itual exercise and a means of drawing closer toGod. His classical training was now directed tothe deeper service of the ecclesial community. Wethink of the assistance he gave to Pope Damasusand his commitment to the instruction of women,especially in the study of Hebrew, from the time

which I thought I knew and even more so aboutthat of which I was not sure”.18 Conscious of hislimitations, he asked for constant prayer and in-tercession for his efforts to translate the sacredtexts “in the same Spirit by whom they were writ-ten”.19 Nor did he fail to translate works by au-thors indispensable for exegesis, such as Origen,“in order to make them available to those whowould like to study this material more deeply andsystematically”.20

As an enterprise carried out within the com-munity and at the service of the community,J e ro m e ’s scholarly activity can serve as an ex-ample of synodality for us and for our own time.It can also serve as a model for the Church’s vari-ous cultural institutions, called to be “placeswhere knowledge becomes service, for no genuineand integral human development can occurwithout a body of knowledge that is the fruit ofcooperation and leads to greater cooperation”.21

The basis of such communion is Scripture, whichwe cannot read merely on our own: “The Biblewas written by the People of God for the Peopleof God, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.Only in this communion with the People of Godcan we truly enter as a ‘we’ into the heart of thetruth that God himself wishes to convey to us”.22

His solid experience of a life nurtured by theword of God enabled Jerome, through the manyletters he wrote, to become a spiritual guide. Hebecame a fellow traveller to many, for he was con-vinced that “no skill can be learned without ateacher”. Thus he wrote to Rusticus: “This iswhat I would like to make you understand, tak-ing you by the hand like an ancient mariner, thesurvivor of several shipwrecks, attempting toteach a young sailor”.23 From his peaceful cornerof the world, he followed the course of human af-fairs in an age of great upheaval, marked byevents like the sack of Rome in 410, which af-fected him deeply.

In those letters he dealt with doctrinal contro-versies, constantly in defence of sound doctrine.His letters also show the value he placed on rela-tionships. Jerome could be forceful but alsogentle, sincerely concerned for others, and, since“love is priceless”,24 enthusiastic in showing genu-ine affection. This can also be seen from the factthat he offered his works of translation and com-mentary as a munus amicitiae. They were to be agift above all for his friends, correspondents andthose to whom his works were dedicated — all ofwhom he begged to read them with a friendlyrather than a critical eye — but also for his read-ers, his contemporaries and those who wouldcome after them.25

Jerome spent the last years of his life in theprayerful reading of Scripture, both privately andin community, in contemplation and in servinghis brothers and sisters through his writings. Allthis in Bethlehem, near the grotto where theeternal Word was born of the Virgin Mary. For hewas convinced that “they are blessed who bearwithin them the cross, the resurrection, the placesof Christ’s nativity and ascension! Blessed arethey who have Bethlehem in their heart, in whoseheart Christ is born each day!”.26

The “sapiential” aspect of Jerome’s lifeTo understand Saint Jerome’s personality fully,

we need to unite two dimensions that character-ized his life as a believer: on the one hand, an ab-solute and austere consecration to God, renoun-cing all human satisfaction for love of Christ cru-cified (cf. 1 Cor 2:2; Phil 3:8.10), and on the other,a commitment to diligent study, aimed purely atan ever deeper understanding of the Christianmystery. This double witness, wondrously offeredby Saint Jerome, can serve as a model above allfor monks, since all who live a life of asceticismand prayer are urged to devote themselves to theexacting labour of research and reflection. It islikewise a model for scholars, who should alwayskeep in mind that knowledge has religious value

only if it is grounded in an exclusive love forGod, apart from all human ambition and worldlyaspiration.

These two aspects of his life have found ex-pression in the history of art. Saint Jerome wasfrequently depicted by great masters of Westernpainting following two distinct iconographic tra-ditions. One can be described as primarily mon-astic and penitential, showing Jerome with a bodyemaciated by fasting, living in the desert, kneel-ing or prostrate on the ground, in many casesclutching a rock and beating his breast, his eyesturned towards the crucified Lord. In this line, wefind the moving masterpiece of Leonardo daVinci now in the Vatican Museums. Another tra-dition shows Jerome in the garb of a scholar,seated at his writing desk, intent on translatingand commenting on the sacred Scriptures, sur-rounded by scrolls and parchments, devoted todefending the faith through his erudition and hiswritings. Albrecht Dürer, to cite one famous ex-ample, portrayed him more than once in thisp ose.

The two aspects are brought together in thepainting by Caravaggio located in the BorgheseGallery in Rome: indeed in a single scene the eld-erly ascetic is shown dressed simply in a red robewith a skull on his table, a symbol of the vanityof earthly realities; but at the same time he isevidently depicted as a scholar, his eyes fixed ona book as his hand dips a quill into an inkwellthe typical act of a writer.

These two “sapiential” aspects were very muchevident in Jerome’s — own life. If, as a true “Lionof Bethlehem”, he could be violent in his lan-guage, it was always in the service of a truth towhich he was unconditionally committed. As heexplained in the first of his writings, the Life ofSaint Paul, Hermit of Thebes, lions can roar butalso weep.27 What might at first appear as twoseparate aspects of Saint Jerome’s character werejoined by the Holy Spirit through a process of in-terior maturation.

Love for sacred ScriptureThe distinctive feature of Saint Jerome’s spir-

ituality was undoubtedly his passionate love forthe word of God entrusted to the Church in sac-red Scripture. All the Doctors of the Church —particularly those of the early Christian era —drew the content of their teaching explicitly fromthe Bible. Yet Jerome did so in a more systematicand distinctive way.

Exegetes in recent times have come to appreci-ate the narrative and poetic genius of the Bibleand its great expressive quality. Jerome insteademphasized in sacred Scripture the humble char-acter of God’s revelation, set down in the roughand almost primitive cadences of the Hebrew lan-guage in comparison to the refinement of Cicero-nian Latin. He devoted himself to the study ofsacred Scripture not for aesthetic reasons, but —as is well known — only because Scripture hadled him to know Christ. Indeed, ignorance ofScripture is ignorance of Christ.28

Jerome teaches us that not only should theGospels and the apostolic Tradition present inthe Acts of the Apostles and in the Letters bestudied and commented on, but that the entireOld Testament is indispensable for understandingthe truth and the riches of Christ.29 The Gospelitself gives evidence of this: it speaks to us of Je-sus as the Teacher who appeals to Moses, theProphets and the Psalms (cf. Lk 4:16-21; 24:27.44-47) in order to explain his own mystery. Thepreaching of Peter and Paul in the Acts of theApostles is likewise rooted in the Old Testament,apart from which we cannot fully understand thefigure of the Son of God, the Messiah and Sa-viour. Nor should the Old Testament be thoughtof merely as a vast repertoire of citations thatprove the fulfilment of the ancient prophecies inthe person of Jesus of Nazareth. Rather, only inlight of the Old Testament prefigurements is it


Devotion to sacred Scripture,a “living and tender love”

for the written word of God:this is the legacy that Saint Jerome

bequeathed to the Churchby his life and labours

(@Pontifex)

of the first cenacle on the Aventine. In this way,he enabled Paula and Eustochium to “enter theserried ranks of translators”,15 and, something un-heard of in those days, to read and chant thePsalms in the original language.16

His great erudition was employed in offering anecessary service to those called to preach theGospel. As he reminded his friend Nepotianus:“the word of the priest must be flavoured by thereading of Scripture. I do not wish that you be adisclaimer or charlatan of many words, but onewho understands the sacred doctrine (mysterii)and knows deeply the teachings (s a c ra m e n t o r u m )of your God. It is typical of the ignorant to playaround with words and to garner the admirationof inexpert people by speaking quickly. Thosewho are shameless often explain that which theydo not know and pretend to be a great expertonly because they succeed in persuading others”.17

J e ro m e ’s years in Bethlehem, to the time of hisdeath in 420, were the most fruitful and intenseperiod of his life, completely dedicated to thestudy of Scripture and to the monumental workof translating the entire Old Testament on thebasis of the original Hebrew. At the same time, hecommented on the prophetic books, the Psalmsand the letters of Paul, and wrote guides to thestudy of the Bible. The deep learning that flowedover into his works was the fruit of a collaborativeeffort, from the copying and collating ofmanuscripts to further reflection and discussion.As he put it: “I have never ever trusted in myown powers to study the divine volumes… I havethe habit of asking questions, also about that


vocative and seemingly harsh. We can better un-derstand the polemical dimension of his writingsif we read them in the light of the most authenticprophetic tradition. Jerome thus emerges as amodel of uncompromising witness to the truththat employs the harshness of reproof in order tofoster conversion. By the intensity of his expres-sions and images, he shows the courage of a ser-vant desirous not of pleasing others, but his Lordalone (Gal 1:10), for whose sake he expended allhis spiritual energy.

The study of sacred ScriptureSaint Jerome’s impassioned love for the divine

Scriptures was steeped in obedience. First, toGod who revealed himself in words that demanda reverent hearing,31 and, then to those in theChurch who represent the living Tradition thatinterprets the revealed message. The “ob edienceof faith” (Rom 1:5; 16:26) is not, however, a merepassive reception of something already known; onthe contrary it demands an active personal effortto understand what was spoken. We can think ofSaint Jerome as a “servant” of the word, faithfuland industrious, entirely devoted to fostering inhis brothers and sisters in faith a more adequateunderstanding of the sacred “dep osit” e n t ru s t e dto them (cf. 1 Tim 6:20; 2 Tim 1:14). Without anunderstanding of what was written by the in-spired authors, the word of God itself is deprivedof its efficacy (cf. Mt 13:19) and love for God can-not spring up.

This shows the need for the mediation of an in-terpreter, who can exercise a “diaconal” functionon behalf of the person who cannot understandthe meaning of the prophetic message. Here wethink of the deacon Philip, sent by the Lord toapproach the chariot of the eunuch who wasreading a passage from Isaiah (53:7-8), withoutbeing able to unlock its meaning. “Do you under-stand what you are reading?” asked Philip, andthe eunuch replied: “How can I, unless someoneguides me?” (Ac t s 8:30-31).32

Jerome can serve as our guide because, likePhilip (cf. Ac t s 8:35), he leads every reader to themystery of Jesus, while responsibly and systemat-ically providing the exegetical and cultural in-formation needed for a correct and fruitful read-ing of the Scriptures.33 In an integrated and skil-ful way he employed all the methodological re-sources available in his day — competence in thelanguages in which the word of God was handeddown, careful analysis and examination ofmanuscripts, detailed archeological research, aswell as knowledge of the history of interpretation— in order to point to a correct understanding ofthe inspired Scriptures.

This outstanding aspect of the activity of SaintJerome is also of great importance for the Churchin our own time. If, as Dei Verbum teaches, theBible constitutes as it were “the soul of sacredtheology”34 and the spiritual support of the Chris-tian life,35 the interpretation of the Bible must ne-cessarily be accompanied by specific skills.

Centres of excellence for biblical research —such as the Pontifical Biblical Institute in Rome,and the École Biblique and the Studium Biblic-um Franciscanum in Jerusalem — and for patristicresearch, like the Augustinianum in Rome, cer-tainly serve this purpose, but every Faculty ofTheology should strive to ensure that the teach-ing of sacred Scripture is carried out in such away that students are provided with necessarytraining in interpretative skills, both in the ex-egesis of texts and in biblical theology as a whole.Sadly, the richness of Scripture is neglected orminimized by many because they were not af-forded a solid grounding in this area. Togetherwith a greater emphasis on the study of Scripturein ecclesiastical programmes of training for priestsand catechists, efforts should also be made toprovide all the faithful with the resources neededto be able to open the sacred book and drawfrom it priceless fruits of wisdom, hope and life.36

Here I would recall an observation made byPope Benedict XVI in the Apostolic ExhortationVerbum Domini: “The [sacramental nature] of theword can be understood by analogy with the realpresence of Christ under the appearances of theconsecrated bread and wine… Saint Jeromespeaks of the way we ought to approach both theEucharist and the word of God: ‘We are readingthe sacred Scriptures. For me, the Gospel is thebody of Christ; for me, the holy Scriptures are histeaching. And when he says: whoever does not eatmy flesh and drink my blood (Jn 6:53), even thoughthese words can also be understood of the[Eucharistic] Mystery, Christ’s body and bloodare really the word of Scripture, God’s teach-ing’”.37

Sadly, many Christian families seem unable —as was prescribed in the Torah (cf. Dt 6:6) — tointroduce their children to the word of the Lordin all its beauty and spiritual power. This led meto institute the Sunday of the Word of God38 as ameans of encouraging the prayerful reading of theBible and greater familiarity with God’s word.39

All other expressions of piety will thus be en-riched with meaning, placed in their proper per-spective and directed to the fulfilment of faith incomplete adherence to the mystery of Christ.

The VulgateThe “sweetest fruit of the arduous cultivation”40

of Jerome’s study of Greek and Hebrew was histranslation of the Old Testament into Latin fromthe original Hebrew. Up to that time, Christiansof the Roman empire could read the Bible in itsentirety only in Greek. The books of the NewTestament had been written in Greek; a completeGreek version of the Old Testament also existed,the so-called Septuagint, the translation made bythe Jewish community of Alexandria around thesecond century before Christ. Yet for readers ofLatin, there was no complete version of the Biblein their language; only some partial and incom-plete translations from the Greek. To Jerome andthose who continued his work belongs the meritof undertaking a revision and a new translation ofthe whole of Scripture. Having begun the revi-sion of the Gospels and the Psalms in Rome withthe encouragement of Pope Damasus, Jerome,from his cell in Bethlehem, then started the trans-lation of all the Old Testament books directlyfrom the Hebrew. This work lasted for manyyears.

To complete this labour of translation, Jeromeput to good use his knowledge of Greek andHebrew, as well as his solid training in Latin, em-ploying the philological tools he had at his dis-posal, in particular Origen’s Hexapla. The finaltext united continuity in formulas by now in com-mon use with a greater adherence to the Hebrewstyle, without sacrificing the elegance of the Latinlanguage. The result was a true monument thatmarked the cultural history of the West, shapingits theological language. Jerome’s translation,


On the 1600th anniversary of the death of Saint Jeromepossible to know more profoundly the meaning ofthe Christ event as revealed in his death and re-surrection. Today we need to rediscover, in cat-echesis and preaching, as well as in theologicalexposition, the indispensable contribution of theOld Testament, which should be read and diges-ted as a priceless source of spiritual nourishment(cf. Ez 3:1-11; Rev 10:8-11).30

J e ro m e ’s complete devotion to Scripture isshown by his impassioned way of speaking andwriting, similar to that of the ancient prophets.From them, this Doctor of the Church drew theinner fire that became a vehement and explosiveword (cf. Jer 5:14; 20:9; 23:29; Ma l 3:2; Sir 48:1;Mt 3:11; Lk 12:49) necessary for expressing theburning zeal of one who serves the cause of God.As with Elijah, John the Baptist and the ApostlePaul, indignation at lies, hypocrisy and falseteaching inflamed Jerome’s speech, making it pro-

Biblical passages are not always immediatelyaccessible. As Isaiah said (29:11), even for thosewho know how to “re a d ” — that is, those whohave had a sufficient intellectual training — thesacred book appears “sealed”, hermeticallyclosed to interpretation. A witness is needed tointervene and provide the key to its liberatingmessage, which is Christ the Lord. He alone isable to break the seal and open the book (cf.Rev 5:1-10) and in this way unveil its wondrousoutpouring of grace (Lk 4:17-21). Many, evenamong practising Christians, say openly thatthey are not able to read it (cf. Is 29:12), not be-cause of illiteracy, but because they are unpre-pared for the biblical language, its modes of ex-pression and its ancient cultural traditions. As aresult the biblical text becomes indecipherable,as if it were written in an unknown alphabet andan esoteric tongue.

“Saint Jerome”, Caravaggio (1606)



after initially encountering some rejection, quicklybecame the common patrimony of both scholarsand ordinary believers; hence the name “Vu l -gate”.41 Medieval Europe learned to read, prayand think from the pages of the Bible translatedby Jerome. In this way, “sacred Scripture becamea sort of ‘immense lexicon’ (Paul Claudel) and‘iconographic atlas’ (Marc Chagall), from whichboth Christian culture and art could draw”.42 Lit-erature, art and even popular language have con-tinually been shaped by Jerome’s translation ofthe Bible, leaving us great treasures of beauty anddevotion.

It was due to this indisputable fact that theCouncil of Trent, in its decree I n s u p e r, affirmedthe “authentic” character of the Vulgate, thus at-testing to its use in the Church through the cen-turies and bearing witness to its value as a toolfor the purpose of study, preaching and publicdisputation.43 Yet the Council did not seek tominimize the importance of the original lan-guages, as Jerome never stopped insisting, muchless forbid undertaking a comprehensive transla-tion in the future. Saint Paul VI, following the in-dication of the Fathers of the Second VaticanCouncil, desired that the work of revising theVulgate be brought to completion and placed atthe service of the whole Church. Thus in 1979Saint John Paul II, in the Apostolic ConstitutionScripturarum Thesaurus44 promulgated the typicaledition called the “N e o - Vu l g a t e ”.

Translation as inculturationBy his translation, Jerome succeeded in “incul-

turating” the Bible in the Latin language and cul-ture. His work became a permanent paradigm forthe missionary activity of the Church. In effect,“whenever a community receives the message ofsalvation, the Holy Spirit enriches its culture withthe transforming power of the Gospel”.45 Here akind of circularity is established: just as Jerome’stranslation is indebted to the language and cul-ture of classical Latin, whose influence is veryevident, so his translation, by its language and itssymbolic and highly imaginative content, becamein turn an impetus to the creation of a new cul-t u re .

J e ro m e ’s work of translation teaches us that thevalues and positive forms of every culture repres-ent an enrichment for the whole Church. The dif-ferent ways by which the word of God is pro-claimed, understood and experienced in each newtranslation enrich Scripture itself since, accordingto the well-known expression of Gregory theGreat, Scripture grows with the reader,46 takingon new accents and new resonance throughoutthe centuries. The entrance of the Bible and theGospel into different cultures renders the Churchever more clearly “a bride bedecked with jewels”(Is 61:10). At the same time it witnesses to the factthat the Bible continually needs to be translatedinto the linguistic and mental categories of eachculture and generation, also in the secularizedglobal culture of our time.47

It has been rightly pointed out that an analogyexists between translation as an act of “linguistic”hospitality and other forms of hospitality.48 Thisis why translation does not concern languagealone but really reflects a broader ethical decisionconnected with an entire approach to life.Without translation, different linguistic com-munities would be unable to communicate amongthemselves; we would close the doors of historyto one another and negate the possibility ofbuilding a culture of encounter.49 In effect,without translation there can be no such hospital-ity; indeed hostility would increase. A translator isa bridge builder. How many hasty judgments aremade, how many condemnations and conflictsarise from the fact that we do not understand thelanguage of other persons and fail to applyourselves, with firm hope, to the endless demon-stration of love that translation represents.

Jerome too had to counter the dominantthought of his time. If the knowledge of Greekwas relatively common at the dawn of the RomanEmpire, by his time it was already becoming ararity. He came to be one of the best experts inGreco-Christian language and literature and heundertook a still more arduous and solitary jour-ney when he undertook the study of Hebrew. If,as it has been said, “the limits of my language arethe limits of my world”,50 we can say that we oweto Saint Jerome’s knowledge of languages a moreuniversal understanding of Christianity and onesteeped more deeply in its sources.

With the celebration of this anniversary of thedeath of Saint Jerome, our gaze turns to the ex-traordinary missionary vitality expressed by thefact that the the word of God has been translatedinto more than three thousand languages. To howmany missionaries do we owe the invaluable pub-lication of grammars, dictionaries and other lin-guistic tools that enable greater communicationand become vehicles for “the missionary aspira-tion of reaching everyone”!51 We need to supportthis work and invest in it, helping to overcomelimits in communication and lost opportunitiesfor encounter. Much remains to be done. It hasbeen said that without translation there can be nounderstanding:52 we would understand neitherourselves nor others.

Jerome and the Chair of PeterJerome always had a special relationship with

the city of Rome: Rome was the spiritual havento which he constantly returned. In Rome he wastrained as a humanist and formed as a Christian;Jerome was a homo Romanus. This bond arose ina very particular way from the Latin language ofwhich he was a master and which he deeplyloved, but above all from the Church of Romeand especially the Chair of Peter. The icono-graphic tradition anachronistically depicts himwearing the robes of a cardinal as a sign of hisbeing a priest of Rome under Pope Damasus. InRome he began to revise the earlier translation.Even when jealousies and misunderstandingsforced him to leave the city, he always remainedstrongly linked to the Chair of Peter.

For Jerome, the Church of Rome is the fertileground where the seed of Christ bears abundantf ru i t . 53 At a turbulent time in which the seamlessgarment of the Church was often torn by divi-sions among Christians, Jerome looked to theChair of Peter as a sure reference point. “As I fol-low no leader save Christ, so I communicate withnone but Your Holiness, that is, with the Chair ofPeter. For this, I know, is the rock on which theChurch is built”. At the height of the controversywith the Arians, he wrote to Damasus: “He thatdoes not gather with you scatters; he that is notof Christ is of antichrist”.54 Consequently Jeromecould also state: “He who is united to the Chairof Peter is one with me”.55

Jerome was often involved in bitter disputes forthe cause of the faith. His love for the truth andhis ardent defence of Christ perhaps led him toan excess of verbal violence in his letters andwritings. Yet he lived for peace: “I wish for peaceas much as others; and not only do I wish for it,I ask for it. But the peace which I want is thepeace of Christ; a true peace, a peace withoutrancour, a peace which does not involve war, apeace which will not reduce opponents but willunite friends”.56

Today more than ever, our world needs themedicine of mercy and communion. Here Iwould like to say once again: let us offer a radiantand attractive witness of fraternal communion.57

“By this all will know that you are my disciples, ifyou have love for one another” (Jn 13:35). This iswhat Jesus, with intense prayer, asked of theFather: “that they may all be one… in us… sothat the world may believe” (Jn 17:21).

Loving what Jerome lovedAt the conclusion of this Letter, I wish to ad-

dress an appeal to everyone. Among the manytributes paid to Saint Jerome by later generations,one is that he was not simply one of the greatestscholars of the “library” from which Christianitywas enriched over the course of time, beginningfrom the treasury of sacred Scripture. It couldalso be said of Jerome that, as he himself said ofNepotianus, “by assiduous reading and constantmeditation he made his heart a library ofChrist”.58 Jerome spared no effort in expandinghis own library, which he always viewed as an in-dispensable workshop for understanding the faithand the spiritual life; in this way he serves as afine example also for the present time. But he didnot stop there. For him, study was not limited tothe years of his youthful training, but a continualcommitment, a daily priority. We can say that hebecame himself a library and a source of know-ledge for countless others. Postumianus, whotraveled throughout the East in the fourth centuryin order to explore the growth of monasticismand spent some months with Jerome, saw thiswith his own eyes. As he wrote: “[Jerome] is al-ways occupied in reading, always at his books: hetakes no rest day or night; he is perpetually eitherreading or writing something”.59

In this regard, I often think of the experience ayoung person can have today entering a book-shop in his or her city, or visiting an Internet site,to look for the section on religious books. Inmost cases, this section, when it exists, is not onlymarginal but poorly stocked with works of sub-stance. Looking at those bookshelves orwebpages, it is difficult for a young person to un-derstand how the quest of religious truth can be apassionate adventure that unites heart and mind;how the thirst for God has inflamed great mindsthroughout the centuries up to the present time;how growth in the spiritual life has influencedtheologians and philosophers, artists and poets,historians and scientists. One of the problems weface today, not only in religion, is illiteracy: thehermeneutic skills that make us credible interpret-ers and translators of our own cultural traditionare in short supply. I would like to pose a chal-lenge to young people in particular: begin explor-ing your heritage. Christianity makes you heirs ofan unsurpassed cultural patrimony of which youmust take ownership. Be passionate about thishistory which is yours. Dare to fix your gaze onthe young Jerome who, like the merchant in Je-sus’ parable, sold all that he had in order to buythe “pearl of great price” (Mt 13:46).

Jerome can truly be called the “library ofChrist”, a perennial library that, sixteen centurieslater, continues to teach us the meaning ofChrist’s love, a love that is inseparable from anencounter with his word. This is why the presentanniversary can be seen as a summons to lovewhat Jerome loved, to rediscover his writings andto let ourselves be touched by his robust spiritual-ity, which can be described in essence as a restlessand impassioned desire for a greater knowledgeof the God who chose to reveal himself. How canwe not heed, in our day, the advice that Jeromeunceasingly gave to his contemporaries: “Readthe divine Scriptures constantly; never let the sac-red volume fall from your hand”?60

A radiant example of this is the Virgin Mary,evoked by Jerome above all as Virgin and Moth-er, but also as a model of prayerful reading of theScriptures. Mary pondered these things in herheart (cf. Lk 2:19.51) “because she was a holy wo-man, had read the sacred Scriptures, knew theprophets, and recalled that the angel Gabriel hadsaid to her the same things that the prophets hadf o re t o l d … She looked at her newborn child, heronly son, lying in the manger and crying. Whatshe saw was, in fact, the Son of God; she com-pared what she saw with all that she had read andh e a rd ”.61 Let us, then, entrust ourselves to OurLady who, more than anyone, can teach us how



to read, meditate, contemplate and pray to God,who tirelessly makes himself present in our lives.

Given in Rome, at the Basilica of Saint JohnLateran, on 30 September, the Memorial of Saint

Jerome, in the year 2020, the eighth of myPontificate.

1 “Deus qui beato Hieronymo presbitero suavemet vivum Scripturae Sacrae affectum tribuisti, da,ut populus tuus verbo tuo uberius alatur et in eofontem vitae inveniet”. Collecta Missae SanctaeHieronymi, Missale Romanum, editio typica tertia,Civitas Vaticana, 2002.2 Epistula (hereafter Ep.) 22, 30: CSEL 54, 190.3 AAS 12 (1920), 385-423.4 Cf. General Audiences of 7 and 14 November2007: Insegnamenti, III, 2 (2007), 553-556; 586-591.5 SYNOD OF BISHOPS, Twelfth Ordinary General As-s e m b l y, Message to the People of God (24 October2008).6 Cf. AAS 102 (2010), 681-787.7 C h ro n i c u m 374: PL 27, 697-698.8 Ep. 125, 12: CSEL 56, 131.9 Cf. Ep. 122, 3: CSEL 56, 63.10 Cf. Morning Meditation, 10 December 2015. Theanecdote is related in A. L O U F, Sotto la guida delloSpirito, Qiqaion, Mangano (BI), 1990, 154-155.11 Cf. Ep. 125, 12: CSEL 56, 131.12 Cf. Apostolic Exhortation Verbum Domini, 89:AAS 102 (2010), 761-762.13 Cf. Ep. 125, 9.15.19: CSEL 56, 128.133-134.139.14 Vita Malchi monachi captivi, 7, 3: PL 23, 59-60.15 Praefatio in Librum Esther, 2: PL 28, 1505.16 Cf. Ep. 108, 26: CSEL 55, 344-345.17Ep. 52, 8: CSEL 54, 428-429; cf. Verbum Domini,60: AAS 102 (2010), 739.18 Praefatio in Librum Paralipomenon LXX, 1.10-15:Sources Chrétiennes 592, 340.19 Praefatio in Pentateuchum: PL 28, 184.20 Ep. 80, 3: CSEL 55, 105.

21 Message on the Occasion of the Twenty-fourth Pub-lic Session of the Pontifical Academies, 4 December2019: L’Osservatore Romano, 6 December 2019, p.8.22 Verbum Domini, 30: AAS 102 (2010), 709.23 Ep. 125, 15.2: CSEL 56, 133.120.24 Ep. 3, 6: CSEL 54, 18.25 Cf. Praefatio in Librum Iosue, 1, 9-12: SCh 592,316.26 Homilia in Psalmum 95: PL 26, 1181.27 Cf. Vita S. Pauli primi eremitae, 16, 2: PL 23, 28.28 Cf. In Isaiam Prologus: PL 24, 17.29 Cf. SECOND VAT I C A N ECUMENICAL COUNCIL,Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation DeiVe r b u m , 14.30 Cf. ibid.31 Cf. ibid., 7.32 Cf. SAINT JEROME, Ep. 53, 5: CSEL 54, 451.

33 Cf. SECOND VAT I C A N ECUMENICAL COUNCIL,Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation DeiVe r b u m , 12.34 Ibid., 24.35 Cf. ibid., 25.36 Cf. ibid., 21.37 N. 56; cf. In Psalmum 147: CCL 78, 337-338.38 Cf. Apostolic Letter Motu Proprio Aperuit Illis,30 September 2019.39 Cf. Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium,152.175: AAS 105 (2013), 1083-1084.1093.40 Cf. Ep. 52, 3: CSEL 54, 417.41 Cf. Apostolic Exhortation Verbum Domini, 72:AAS 102 (2010), 746-747.42 SAINT JOHN PAU L II, Letter to Artists (4 April1999), 5: AAS 91 (1999), 1159-1160.43 Cf. DENZIGER-SCHÖNMETZER, Enchiridion Sym-bolorum, ed. 43, 1506.4425 April 1979: AAS 71 (1979), 557-559.45 Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, 116:AAS 105 (2013), 1068.46 Homilia in Ezechielem I, 7: PL 76, 843D.47 Cf. Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium,116: AAS 105 (2013), 1068.48 Cf. P. RICOEUR, Sur la traduction, Paris, 2004.49 Cf. Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium,24: AAS 105 (2013), 1029-1030.50 L. WITTGENSTEIN, Tractatus Logico-Philosophi-cus, 5.6.51 Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, 31:AAS 105 (2013), 1033.52 Cf. G. STEINER, After Babel. Aspects of Languageand Translation, New York, 1975.53 Cf. Ep. 15, 1: CSEL 54, 63.54 Ibid., 15, 2: CSEL 54, 62-64.55 Ibid., 16, 2: CSEL 54, 69.56 Ibid., 82, 2: CSEL 55, 109.57 Cf. Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium,99: AAS 105 (2013), 1061.58 Ep. 60, 10; CSEL 54, 561.59 SUPLICIUS SEVERUS, Dialogus I, 9, 5: SCh 510,136-138.60 Ep 52, 7: CSEL 54, 426.61 Homilia de Nativitate Domini I V: PL Suppl. 2, 191.

On the 1600th anniversary of the death of Saint Jerome

Cardinal Ravasi: Like a “library of Christ”

It is a fact that, even with the dif-ferences of eras, the Vu l g a t e still ex-erts an undoubted literary fascina-tion today, also for its use in the his-tory of art and music. Moreover, asstated, in some way it has condi-tioned theological thought andvocabulary. Now, French scholarGeorges Mounin has ironicallydefined every good translation as abelle infidèle, beautiful yes, but with adegree of infidelity with respect tothe original matrix, above all wheninvolving different linguistic andcultural systems. He proceeded inthe wake of the great Cervantes, theauthor of Don Quixote, convincedthat every version was like the dullback side of a fine tapestry. Theproblems raised by translating a textare not, in fact, only linguistic-liter-ary but hermeneutic, especially whenthere is a “s a c re d ” Scripture in-volved. However, still today Jeromeremains, precisely in this sense, anemblem of merit and method, with

his rigour and his freedom, with hisknowledge and his creativity.

But going beyond strictly criticalquestions the Pope, almost underly-ing the whole text, guides the eccle-sial community in this centenary cel-ebration to understand the substan-tial legacy of Saint Jerome, that is,the love created from the study ofand vital coherence to the Word ofGod. This is a theme constantly ex-alted by the ecclesial Magisterium,particularly the statements of theSecond Vatican Council with DeiVe r b u m , the Apostolic ExhortationVerbum Domini which Benedict XVIissued precisely in memory of theSaint on 30 September 2010, Evan-gelii Gaudium and Aperuit Illis byPope Francis himself, nor can weforget that in the parallel 15th cen-tenary of Jerome’s death, in 1920 Be-nedict XV promulgated the Encyclic-al Spiritus Paraclitus. Indeed, the“distinctive feature of Saint Jerome’sspirituality was undoubtedly his pas-sionate love for the word of God en-trusted to the Church in sacredS c r i p t u re ”.

Other features emerge from thepages of the Apostolic Letter. Inparticular his theoretical and practic-al commitment to monastic life, aswell as his profound love for theVirgin Mother who “pondered... inher heart” (Lk 2:19, 51) “because shewas a holy woman, had read the sac-red Scriptures, knew the prophets,and recalled that the angel Gabrielhad said to her the same things thatthe prophets had foretold”.

One feature, usually less emphas-ized but which Pope Francis insteaddevelops, is the Saint’s connectionwith the Chair of Peter. Also prevail-ing in the Father of the Church isthat christological axis that guidesnot only his faith but also his ex-egesis. In fact, what he himselfwrote about his friend Nepotianusalso applies to him: “by constantreading and long-continued medita-tion he had made his heart a libraryof Christ”.

This preface — dedicated to atruly luminous text as are thesepages consecrated by Pope Francisto a Father of the Church of an ar-

dent and even provocative tempera-ment, but also of clear and warmfaith as Saint Jerome was — couldeasily have a seal in the same ponti-fical document. The final summary,in fact, is to be sought in the Let-ter’s concluding appeal. Returningto the image just offered of the “lib-rary of Christ”, the Pope reminds usthat Jerome’s is a living library that“continues to teach us the meaningof Christ’s love, a love that is insep-arable from an encounter with hisword. This is why the present an-niversary can be seen as a summonsto love what Jerome loved, to redis-cover his writings and to letourselves be touched by his robustspirituality, which can be describedin essence as a restless and impas-sioned desire for a greater know-ledge of the God who chose to re-veal himself. How can we not heed,in our day, the advice that Jeromeunceasingly gave to his contempor-aries: “Read the divine Scripturesconstantly; never let the sacredvolume fall from your hand?”.


“St Jerome in the Wilderness”, Guercino


Celebrating the Centennial of Stella MarisThe familiar logo has been redesigned to respond to the signs of the time

CENTENARY P R AY E R

O Mary, Star of the Sea, as we celebrate with prayer and devotion theCentenary of this apostolate of silent service with the greatest of compassionand love, we humbly ask you, O Holy Mother of God, to guide always andeverywhere all people of the sea and those who care and minister to them.

O Virgin most powerful, as we sail upon the stormy seas of life, we pray,come to our aide, help us to remain steadfast, and be for all seafarers andfishers across the waters of this earth, and their families, the Ark of the cov-enant gently navigating the Ship of Faith, the Church, to a port of safehaven in Jesus Christ.O Mary of the morning star, continue to be the consolation and sure hopeto enlighten our hearts and minds so that we may never lose or stumble inour Faith in keeping a firm and fixed compass bearing on your Son, OurLord, who is, who was and will ever be our true and only salvation for alleternity without end. Amen.

Our Lady Star of the Sea, Pray for us.

This year, on 4 October, Glasgow,Scotland was intended to be the siteof the 25th World Congress and theCentennial Celebration of StellaMaris, but like so many others, theevent was sidelined by the Covid-19pandemic.

Instead of welcoming participantsand delivering his planned dis-course, Cardinal Peter Kodwo Appi-ah Turkson, President of the Ponti-fical Council for the Promotion ofIntegral Human Development, pub-lished a letter to celebrate the cen-tenary of the organization which wasinitially organized in Glasgow 100years ago by a group of lay peoplewho, he observed, “felt they were‘Ap ostles’ entrusted with a missionfrom the Church “to reveal Christ tothose who go down the sea in ships,and do business in great waters,with the object of bringing them toa deeper knowledge of Christ andhis Church”. On the 17 April 1922the Apostleship of the Sea (AOS),originally the Sailors’ Branch of theApostleship of Prayer, received “theapproval and encouragement” ofPope Pius XI, who wished that “sonoble an enterprise” would “s p re a dmore and more along the shores ofboth hemispheres...”.

One hundred years later, CardinalTurkson noted, “we can say withoutdoubt that the desire of Pope PiusXI, supported and sustained by theall-succeeding Pontiffs, is a wonder-ful reality, with hundreds of chap-lains and many more volunteerspresent in around 300 ports, carry-ing out at least 70,000 ship visits ayear and reaching out to more thana million seafarers”. He noted thecentenary year as an occasion “togive thanks for the countless‘Ap ostles’ of all nationalities whowith dedication and commitment indifferent ports of the world, since

the beginning of this ministry, havespent their lives at the service of thepeople of the sea and now havereached the safe harbor of heaven”.

The Cardinal recalled the wordsof Benedict XVI, who encouragedmembers to “be apostles faithful tothe mission of proclaiming the Gos-pel, show the loving face of theChurch which also welcomes andmakes herself close to this portion ofthe People of God; respond withouthesitation to maritime people whowait for you on board to appeasethe deep longing of their soul andmake them feel active members ofthe community”.

Many changes have come aboutthrough the years, such as “l a rg e rand computerized ships, manned bysmaller multinational, multiculturaland multireligious crew, docking inports far away from cities. These cir-cumstances”, Cardinal Turkson re-called, “together with piracy, crimin-alization, abandonment and lastlythe Covid-19 have increased thestress, the fatigue and the isolationof the crew”. Thus “today more thanbefore, in charting the future of ourApostolate, we are called to be opento the Spirit of renewal and findnew ways and means to be theChurch sailing with the people ofthe sea”.

Cardinal Turkson also took theopportunity to describe the newStella Maris logo which, after 100years, “has been redesigned to re-spond to the signs of the time … byaffirming our Catholic roots andmaintaining the distinctive symbol-ism of the past. The logo”, he said,“is not only a nice sticker but it rep-resents our unity and common iden-tity, it should be our guide andsource of our inspiration for ourcommitment at the service of themaritime world:

— The anchor is the symbol ofHope. We are called to be bringHope, in a world of despair of isola-tion.

— The lifesaver is the symbol ofFaith. We have to announce theChristian Faith, to nourish andstrengthen the trust in the Lord, ofmany Catholic crew members.

— The Sacred Heart of Jesus isthe symbol of Charity. We shouldshow Charity to welcome everyonewithout prejudice for their national-ity, race, gender, religious or culturalbackground, always respecting thep erson’s culture and religion.

— The rays of light is the symbolof the Light of Christ. We mustshine the light of Christ to de-nounce a world of injustices, abusesand the exploitation.

And a new element: the waves ofthe sea, highlighting the new con-science of caring for the sea, as theenvironment in which the people ofthe sea live and work”.

Cardinal Turkson emphasizedthat, although the service of the AOS“is a global one and is constitutedby a worldwide network of Centers,the practical implementation of mari-time pastoral ministry in any region,nation, diocese or port, is the re-sponsibility of the local Church”.Thus all Bishops’ Conferences are in-vited “to appoint a Bishop Promoterresponsible to foster the care for thepeople of the sea in the country”,while the bishops of maritime dio-ceses are asked “to appoint chaplainsand consider the seafaring ministryan integral part of the pastoral re-sponsibilities of the diocese and theparishes located near the ports to seethat people of the sea are providedabundantly with whatever is requiredto lead a holy life”.

In the context of the pandemicand its related restrictions, he noted,“our practical way of ministering haschanged dramatically, but whatshould not change is the substanceof our service that is a ‘ministry ofp re s e n c e ’”. Thus he encouragesmembers to “make use of all the in-struments that the technology offersus to be present in the lives of thepeople of the sea offering friendship,support, encouragement and con-tinuous prayers”. The Cardinal ob-served that prayer was “an essential

part of the development of ourapostolate. Looking at the future, ifwe would like to continue grow, as amaritime welfare organization, [it] isvital to rediscover the significance ofprayers and the creation of supportgroups to strengthen the commit-ment and dedication of our chap-lains and volunteers”.

Lastly, on behalf of Stella Maris,Cardinal Turkson expressed solidar-ity with the more than 300,000 sea-farers and marine personnel who arestranded at sea, suffering the hu-manitarian crisis due to the “travelrestrictions, border closures andquarantine measures imposed bymany governments in response tothe Covid-19 pandemic”. Indeedmany seafarers have had “their con-tracts extended far more than the 11-months limit set out in the MaritimeLabour Convention (MLC), awayfrom their loved ones, under mentalstress and physical fatigue”. Thus,he urged “governments togetherwith international, national organiza-tions and port authorities to cooper-ate to solve this dramatic situation”so that we may “see the seafarersstranded at sea back in their coun-tries and reunited with their loveones!”.

Before offering the Centenaryprayer to Mary Star of the Sea, Car-dinal Turkson asked that, “p erson-ally or with the people of the sea, letus pray that in the maritime world,our Apostolate will continue to be abeacon of hope and a secure portfor seafarers, fishers and their famil-ies, for many years more”.

Society with solidarity

just like the “first” — s t re n g t h e n scommunion. A society where di-versity is respected is much moreresistant to any kind of virus.

Let us place this healing jour-ney under the protection of theVirgin Mary, Our Lady ofHealth. May she, who carriedJesus in her womb, help us to betrustful. Inspired by the HolySpirit, we can work together forthe Kingdom of God that Christinaugurated in this world bycoming among us. It is a King-dom of light in the midst of dark-ness, of justice in the midst of somany outrages, of joy in themidst of so much pain, of healingand of salvation in the midst ofsickness and death, of tendernessin the midst of hatred. May Godgrant us to “viralize” love and to“globalize” hope in the light offaith.

SPECIAL GREETINGS

I cordially greet the English-speaking faithful, especially thenew seminarians who have arrivedin Rome to begin their years offormation and the deacons of thePontifical North American Col-lege. May the Lord sustain theirefforts to be faithful servants ofthe Gospel. Upon all of you andyour families I invoke the joy andpeace of Our Lord Jesus Christ.God bless you!

Lastly my thoughts turn asusual to the elderly, to youngpeople, to the sick and to newly-weds. May each one, in whateversituation they may find them-selves, know how to be generousin their commitment to a betterfuture, in the acceptance of trialsand suffering, and in mutual lovefor the edification of a united,true family.



Address of the Cardinal Secretary of State

Moneyval Programme of the Council of EuropeThe following is the English text ofCardinal Pietro Parolin’s address tothe members of the Committee ofExperts of the Evaluators of theMoneyval Programme of the Council ofEurope, whom he met on Wednesday,30 September, in the Vatican.

Your Eminences, Your Excellencies,Esteemed Members of theMoneyval Evaluation Team,Ladies and Gentlemen,When on 4 October 1965 Pope PaulVI addressed the General Assemblyof the United Nations, he intro-duced himself to those present inthe following memorable words:“The one speaking to you is one likeyourselves, your brother, and evenone of the least among you, whorepresent sovereign States. For hepossesses — if you choose to con-sider us from this point of view —only a tiny and practically symbolictemporal sovereignty, the minimumneeded to exercise freely his spiritual

The voice of the Pope insistentlycalls for justice and peace, in oppos-ition to everything that demeans thehuman person in his or her dignityand fundamental rights. As PopeFrancis has said, “When an econom-ic system places only the god ofmoney at the centre, policies of ex-clusion are triggered and there is nolonger any place for men or for wo-men. The human being, then, cre-ates that throwaway culture thatleads to suffering, depriving somany of the right to live and to behappy” (Message for the Twenty-fifthAnniversary of the Populorum Pro-gressio Fo u n d a t i o n , 20 November2017).

From these references alone, it isevident that on the internationalscene, the Holy See is inspired bypurposes different from those ordin-arily pursued by other members ofthe community of nations, and alsothat from its need to pursue thosepurposes, the Holy See has a dis-

mission and to assure those whodeal with him that he is independentof any sovereignty of this world. Hehas no temporal power, no ambitionto enter into competition with you.As a matter of fact, we have nothingto ask, no question to raise; butrather a wish to express, a permis-sion to seek: that of being allowedto serve you in the area of our com-petence, with disinterestedness, hu-mility and love”.

In these few sentences, the Popedescribed the special nature of Vatic-an City State, whose creation in 1929ended the Roman Question that hadarisen with the taking of Rome on20 September 1870 by the Italians.From the outside, Vatican CityState, albeit tiny in size, can belikened to other States. Yet it has acompletely distinctive feature thatmust always be taken into account:it exists to serve the ministry of thePope, ensuring the sovereignty ofthe Holy See and the freedom of theRoman Pontiff. In this sense, it canbe considered functional and instru-mental to a supernatural end.

Saint Paul VI, in that same ad-dress, went on to point out that theHoly See is the bearer “of a messagefor all humanity”. He wished tospeak for “the poor, the disinherited,the suffering, the unfortunate, andthose who long for justice, a digni-fied life, liberty, prosperity and pro-g re s s ”.

tinctive place within that same com-munity. In his address, Saint Paul VIreferred to this distinctive place bypointing out that the presence of theHoly See within the United Nationsis a means of proclaiming the GoodNews: “Here we are celebrating theepilogue to a laborious pilgrimagein search of an opportunity to speakheart to heart with the whole world.It began on the day when we werecommanded: ‘Go, bring the goodnews to all nations’” (Mk 16:15).

Evidently, then, the Holy See’sposition among the members of theinternational system is not basedupon its “symb olic” territorial sover-eignty, but rather on its ability totake actions and build relationshipsin the supranational domain that arein conformity with the evangelicalmandate that determines its exist-ence. As Saint John Paul II said tothe United Nations on the fiftiethanniversary of its foundation, theHoly See, in virtue of its spiritualmission, seeks to advance “the com-mon effort to build the civilizationof love, founded on the universalvalues of peace, solidarity, justice,and liberty” (New York, 5 October1995).

If, on the one hand, this dimen-sion, which we might term “p ro p h e t -ic”, enables the Holy See to be thevoice of the voiceless, it also impliesthat the Holy See itself should beexemplary in the management of all

things pertaining to the State, notleast its economic and financial as-p ects.

It is against this backdrop that wemust understand the engagement ofthe Holy See and of Vatican CityState in the field of finance and in-ternational cooperation in general,and in particular, its decision to takepart in the process of evaluating themeasures for combating money laun-dering and the financing of terror-ism adopted by the Moneyval Pro-gramme of the Council of Europe.

In the fight against money laun-dering and the financing of terror-ism, the Vatican’s internal organiza-tion assigns a prominent role to theFinancial Information Authority,which is responsible for oversightand regulation, and for financial in-formation relative to that specific

ies, the funds managed by the HolySee and the Vatican City State arechiefly directed to works of religionsand charity. Yet that does not de-tract from the fact that — in theways proper to its internal system —they must apply every form of over-sight compatible with their intendedpurposes. Indeed, precisely by virtueof the priority destination of funds,it is necessary that the ethical di-mension of investments be an objectof particular concern.

In November 2015, Pope Francistold the Board of Superintendenceof the Institute for the Works of Re-ligion: “the IOR cannot have as aprimary operating principle that ofthe greatest possible profit, butrather principles compatible with thenorms of morality, consistent effi-ciency and praxis that reflect its spe-

On Wednesday, 30 September, the assessment team of the Committee of Expertson the Evaluation of Measures against Money Laundering and the Financing ofTerrorism initiated its visit to the Vatican. This visit is held in the context of theFifth Evaluation Round, agreed upon 2019, to which all the member jurisdic-tions of Moneyval are subjected.The scope of this phase of evaluations is to assess the effectiveness of the legislativeand institutional measures adopted by the jurisdictions in recent years for the pre-vention of money laundering and the financing of terrorism.The current evaluation for the Holy See is a regular part of a process that beganwith the first on-site visit, in 2012, and the subsequent adoption of the MutualEvaluation Report of the Holy See, of 4 July 2012, followed by the First Pro-gress Report, of 9 December 2013, the Second Progress Report, of 8 December2015, and the Third Progress Report, of 6 December 2017.

sector. In addition, other subjects,under various titles and each in ac-cordance with its respective role,have a part to play regardingpolicies countering money launder-ing and the financing of terrorism.Recently too, nonprofit and volun-teer organizations, as well as canon-ical and civil juridical persons re-gistered in Vatican City State, havebeen directed to report to the AIFany suspicious activities of moneylaundering or the financing of ter-ro r i s m .

As can be seen, systems are pro-gressively being set in place to en-able greater control of financial op-erations potentially exposed to therisk of money laundering and thefinancing of terrorism. In this re-gard, the interventions and recom-mendations of the Moneyval evalu-ators are a resource for which we aregreatly appreciative.

It is clear, too, that, in the light oftheir distinctive features as men-tioned above, the Holy See and Vat-ican City State cannot be treated inthe same way as national States,who are not exposed to these risksin the same way. Unlike other sub-jects participating in the Moneyvalproject, whose economies are aimedat creating wealth and prosperity fortheir respective national communit-

cific nature and exemplarity thatshould mark its operations”. Theseoperative principles, which shouldinspire not only the IOR but alsoevery other agency of the Holy See,certainly include policies for coun-tering money laundering and finan-cing of terrorism. This visit of theMoneyval evaluation team helps usto keep them in even clearer focus.

We are grateful for your presenceand for the encouragement you giveus to render a service that can helpus devise a financial system increas-ingly at the service of men and wo-men. In conclusion, I would like toreturn to the aforementioned addressof Saint Paul VI, in which he de-scribed himself as an “expert in hu-manity”: that humanity which wemust consider in all our actions.That humanity must be the yard-stick of every policy, especially withregard to its economic and financialimplications. If profit should be-come the sole law governing everydecision, a grave error of evaluationwould be made, and we would em-bark on the path of a baneful dehu-manization. I thank you, then, foryour work, which helps us to assessthe potential for the common goodof every choice we make on the eco-nomic and financial plane.


Religious freedom means human freedomCardinal Pietro Parolin intervention at the Symposium


The following is the English text of the closing re-marks of Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Secretary of State,at the Symposium on Advancing and Defending In-ternational Religious Freedom through Diplomacy,held in Rome, Italy on 30 September.

Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,I wish to thank Ambassador Gingrich and thestaff of the Embassy of the United States ofAmerica to the Holy See for organizing this note-worthy one-day symposium, which has reflectedupon the theme of “Advancing and DefendingInternational Religious Freedom through Dip-l o m a c y. ” I am grateful for the invitation to offersome points of reflection for closing remarks.

Dear friends,The protection and promotion of the freedom

of religion is a hallmark of the diplomatic activityof the Holy See. This fundamental human right,together with the inviolable right to life, formsthe indispensable and solid foundation for nu-merous other human rights. Violating this free-dom jeopardizes the enjoyment of all rights andthreatens the dignity of the human person. In-deed, in recognition of the centrality of thisfoundational right, freedom of religion is promin-ently enshrined in the constitutional legislation ofmany nations and is mentioned in a wide rangeof international conventions, including the Uni-versal Declaration of Human Rights. The SecondVatican Council dedicated an entire document toreligious freedom reflecting the growing aware-ness and importance of respecting this funda-mental freedom. In Dignitatis humanae we readthat this freedom “means that all men are to beimmune from coercion on the part of individualsor of social groups and of any human power, insuch wise that no one is to be forced to act in amanner contrary to his own beliefs, whetherprivately or publicly, whether alone or in associ-ation with others, within due limits” (n. 2).

At the heart of exercising the freedom to con-fess and practice a certain religion, or not to fol-low if one so chooses, is the exercise of freedomof conscience, that inner sanctum of man’s tran-scendent nature where “man discovers a lawwhich he has not laid upon himself but which hemust obey. Its voice, ever calling him to love andto do what is good and to avoid evil, sounds inhis heart at the right moment.... For man has inhis heart a law inscribed by God.... His con-science is man’s most secret core and his sanctu-ary. There he is alone with God whose voiceechoes in his depths” (Vatican II, Gaudium etSpes, 16). The Church has always upheld the ne-cessity to respect the internal forum of one’s con-science, not only because of its intrinsic link tothe freedom of religion, but because it is the in-ner sanctum of the human person. Sadly, we arewitnessing a growing number of examples wherethis freedom is being violated, even forcefully soby civil legislation, which effectively amounts toan attack on the dignity of the human person.

I would suggest that, at least in part, some ofthe difficulty that we are experiencing concerningthe violation of freedom of religion at the globallevel comes from a fundamental misunderstand-ing of the meaning of human freedom. Attacks onreligious freedom are often driven by fear andideology: whether by totalitarian regimes that usepower to impose draconian restrictions, as wit-nessed, for example, in countries where the prac-tice of certain religious traditions is prohibitedand “minorities” are actively persecuted, orwhether it be the intolerant voices of the “p olitic-ally correct”, that “silence” and condemn those re-ligious beliefs, traditions and practices that clashwith their progressive ideology, labeling them as“hateful” and “intolerant”. It is time that we re-flect more seriously about the root of “intoler-ance” in such situations and, in particular, theshrinking public space for dialogue for and withthose that practice their beliefs openly. Indeed,the degree of respect for freedom of religion in

the public sphere is a clear indicator of the healthof any society; and, it follows, therefore, that it isalso a “litmus test” for the level of respect that ex-ists for all other fundamental human rights aswell.

My suggestion that the freedom of religion isin crisis because our understanding of the truth ofthe human person and his anthropology is incrisis, is not a novelty. The Fathers of the SecondVatican Council rightly noted that “a sense of thedignity of the human person has been impressingitself more and more deeply on the consciousnessof contemporary man, and the demand is increas-ingly made that men should act on their ownjudgment, enjoying and making use of a respons-ible freedom” (Dignitatis humanae, n. 1). “Thisheightened sense of the dignity of the human per-son and of his or her uniqueness, and of the re-spect due to the journey of conscience, certainlyrepresents one of the positive achievements ofmodern culture. This perception, authentic as itis, has been expressed in a number of more orless adequate ways, some of which however di-verge from the truth about man as a creature andthe image of God, and thus need to be correctedand purified in the light of faith” (Pope JohnPaul II, Veritatis splendor, n. 31). Unfortunately,our growing awareness and affirmation of the dig-nity of the human person has not always been ac-companied by an authentic understanding of themoral duty and responsibility that comes with theexercise of human freedom. This divergence,between dignity and the responsibility inherent tofreedom, has a detrimental impact on the conceptof religious freedom and its enjoyment in modernso ciety.

This point was masterfully elaborated in the in-sightful and in-depth reflection of Saint PopeJohn Paul II in his Encyclical Letter, Ve r i t a t i ss p l e n d o r, the “Splendor of Truth”, wherein, amongother things, he underscores the necessity of hav-ing the proper understanding of human nat u re ,especially its transcendent dimension which isrooted in the powers of intellect and will, exer-cised through the responsible use of freedom inconjunction with the truth about the good. Al-though there are a number of current trends thatundermine the proper persp ective of human free-dom, Saint John Paul II highlights two prominentones. The first we may call “radical subjectivism”or the exaltation of “individual freedom as an ab-solute”.

As he explains: “Certain currents of modernthought have gone so far as to exalt freedom tosuch an extent that it becomes an absolute, whichwould then be the source of values. This is thedirection taken by doctrines which have lost thesense of the transcendent or which are explicitlyatheist. The individual conscience is accorded thestatus of a supreme tribunal of moral judgmentwhich hands down categorical and infallible de-cisions about good and evil. To the affirmationthat one has a duty to follow one’s conscience isunduly added the affirmation that one’s moraljudgment is true merely by the fact that it has itsorigin in the conscience. But in this way the ines-capable claims of truth disappear, yielding theirplace to a criterion of sincerity, authenticity and‘being at peace with oneself’, so much so thatsome have come to adopt a radically subjectivisticconception of moral judgment” (VS, 32). In ourcontemporary societies, particularly in the West,there is a strong tendency to exaggerate one’s per-sonal freedom, to purposefully decouple it fromthe pursuit of the good, or worse, to make it theonly good. As a result, man turns inward, becom-ing self-referential and, what is good, becomeswholly subjective. From there, it is not long be-fore man becomes an island, exercising his free-dom, even apart from right reason. The “highestgo o d” has now become the eradication of anyobstacle to “radical autonomy”, such as the natur-al moral or divine law. Even other fundamental

human rights must be abolished so as to nolonger impede the desire of one’s choosing.

Indeed, another all too common modern mis-conception that interferes with a proper concep-tion of human freedom is the denial of objectivemoral truth, conveniently replaced by an indi-vidual’s personal sentiment or feeling about themoral good.

The Polish Saint continues: “Once the idea ofa universal truth about the good, knowable byhuman reason, is lost, inevitably the notion ofconscience also changes. Conscience is no longerconsidered in its primordial reality as an act of ap erson’s intelligence, the function of which is toapply the universal knowledge of the good in aspecific situation and thus to express a judgmentabout the right conduct to be chosen here andnow. Instead, there is a tendency to grant to theindividual conscience the prerogative of inde-pendently determining the criteria of good andevil and then acting accordingly. Such an outlookis quite congenial to an individualist ethic,wherein each individual is faced with his owntruth, different from the truth of others. Taken toits extreme consequences, this individualism leadsto a denial of the very idea of human nature”(VS, 32).

These reductive approaches to the good andconscience are at the heart of most modern cur-rents of thinking, as well as the predominant lib-eral ideology, which places the moral law andconscience in drastic opp osition, as well as ourhuman nature and freedom. This perceived op-position has devastating consequences for arrivingat the right understanding of human freedom, in-cluding the freedom of conscience and religiousf re e d o m .

Ultimately, the decision to root man’s freedomsolely in the self, without any reference to theCreator, is unsustainable. It leads to a limited un-derstanding of the freedom of religion andstruggles to generate and maintain the space ne-cessary for authentic pluralism and the search forobjective truth, that is truth that does not finishwith me, or with you. While we must continuallyrepeat that religious liberty entails the ability forone to exercise, without coercion and withoutthreat of persecution, one’s religious convictions,whether in private or in public, that is only part ofthe understanding of religious freedom. It is thevia negativa approach, if you will, which statessimply that there should be no coercion in thepractice of religion. However, what we often failto recognize is that freedom of religion is, at thesame time, the freedom to seek the truth. Free-dom of religion is also the freedom “for” belief. Inother words, it must also be understood in the af-firmative. To stress exclusively the expression offreedom of religion as “freedom from external co-e rc i o n ” without addressing what this freedom is


Archbishop Gallagher at the Symposium on Advancing and Defending International Religious Freedom

Divine wisdom is the sourceOpening remarks of Archbishop PaulR. Gallagher, Secretary for Relationwith States of the Holy See at theSymposium on Advancing and Defend-ing International Religious Freedomthrough Diplomacy held in Rome,Italy, on 30 September.

The Honourable Mike Pompeo,Secretary of State,Madam Ambassador Gingrich,Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen,

I am grateful for the invitation tooffer brief remarks at the opening ofthis Symposium on “Advancing andDefending International ReligiousFreedom through Diplomacy” andwish to thank Ambassador Gingrichand her staff in the Embassy for or-ganizing this event. I happily extendto you all the greetings of His Holi-ness, Pope Francis, who is aware ofthis meeting on a topic of great im-portance for the Holy See, especiallyin its diplomatic activities on boththe bilateral and multilateral levels.

Over the past couple of decades,there has been a growing recogni-tion of the important role that reli-gions play in the questions of inter-national peace and security and ofmutual coexistence among peoples.More recently, a number of Govern-ments, including the United Statesof America, have launched initiativesthat seek to defend and promote thisfundamental human right, the re-spect of which is a sine qua non forgiving full respect to each personand in building the common goodof humanity.

It should come as no surprise thatthe protection and promotion of reli-gious liberty is one of the main“political priorities” of the Holy See.In its bilateral relations, the questionof protecting religious freedom so as

to allow the local Catholic Churchto exercise its mission, remains anindispensable part of the scope andactivity of the Holy See. Likewise, invarious multilateral fora, the HolySee is attentive to the trends and at-titudes of the international com-munity as it addresses issues relatedto the freedom of religion and be-lief. It also pays particular attentionto how other so-called “new rights”limit the full enjoyment of religiousfreedom, as well as the importantrole that the Church and other faith-based organizations play in numer-ous charitable, health, educationaland humanitarian efforts throughoutthe world.

Religious freedom is not only im-portant to the Holy See because it isgoverned by the Supreme Pontiff ofthe Catholic Church. Instead, themotivation for defending religiousfreedom rests primarily on its under-standing and concern for the ontolo-gical reality of the human person,created in the image and likeness ofGod, the foundation of man’s inviol-able dignity. The Creator has en-dowed human nature with know-ledge and free will in order to cometo know, to love and to serve Himin complete liberty. Freedom, and inparticular freedom of conscience andreligious liberty, is an essential com-ponent of man’s transcendent dig-nity. As such, coercion, violence anddiscrimination against religiousliberty constitutes an attack uponthe human person, his relationshipwith his Creator, and, indeed, an at-tack against society. It is from thisperspective that the Holy See haseven sought to defend this funda-mental human right, because it isfoundational to each person’s iden-tity and to the free exercise of one’sliberty for the integral development

of each person and of society as awhole.

It is in this context that the HolySee has been assiduously and con-stantly attentive to abuses to reli-gious liberty, whether on the level ofauthoritarian/dictatorial State ornon-State actors, most vividly wit-nessed in those instances wherethere is physical persecution andeven murder of “religious minorit-ies”, or whether through the evermore common tendency, especiallyfound in the West, which promotesideologies and even national legisla-tion that conflicts with the exerciseof religious liberty. I think it is im-portant to be aware of the fact thatattacks against religious liberty arenot only coming in the form ofphysical persecution, but ever morethrough ideological trends and “si-lencing”, through what has oftenbeen called “political correctness”,which are taking ever larger libertiesin the name of “tolerance” and“non-discrimination”. Rather, theseinflexible ideologies, which are quickto denounce religious beliefs andpersons that do not accept their pos-ition as “hateful”, are themselvesrather “intolerable” and “discrimin-atory” against the freedom of reli-gion.

There are a growing number ofexamples of this phenomenon, in-cluding a number of States passinglegislation aggressively attackingboth the freedom of conscience andthe freedom of religion. It is evenpresent within the certain sectors ofmultilateral diplomacy. A recent re-port from the UN Human RightsCouncil regarding the freedom of re-ligion and belief actually claimedthat “The Special Rapporteur isdeeply concerned at numerous re-ports he has received, and at inform-ation provided to other United Na-tions human rights mechanisms, al-leging that religious interest groupsare engaged in campaigns character-izing rights advocates working tocombat gender-based discriminationas ‘immoral’ actors, seeking to un-dermine society by espousing ‘agender ideology’ that is harmful tochildren, families, tradition and reli-gion. Invoking religious tenets aswell as pseudoscience, such actorsargue for the defence of traditionalvalues rooted in interpretations ofreligious teachings about the socialroles for men and women in accord-ance with their alleged naturally dif-ferent physical and mental capacit-ies; often calling on governments toenact discriminatory policies.” (n.34).

The Holy See responded clearlyto this report during the interactivedebate with the following: “Pa r t i c u -larly unacceptable and offensive arethe numerous references that recom-mend that freedom of religion andbelief and conscientious objectionmust be surrendered for the promo-tion of other so-called “humanrights”, which certainly do not enjoyconsensus, thus being a sort of“ideological colonization” on thepart of some States and internation-al institutions. As such, the report,at least in part, is actually an attackon freedom of religion and belief as

well as freedom of conscience”(Holy See Mission, Geneva, 2March 2020).

If I were a cynic, I would say thatit seems that some of those whoshould be defending and promotingreligious liberty either lack the will-ingness truly to do so or seem to bekowtowing to the prevalent ideolo-gical forces that see the exercise ofreligious liberty as a threat to theirown concept of liberty, which is un-derstood in large part as the abilityto do whatever one wants, affirmingoneself without any restriction what-soever, including civil, natural andespecially divine law.

Notwithstanding these difficultiesand threats to religious liberty, in-cluding to the other fundamentalhuman rights connected to it, theHoly See is convinced that remain-ing present and active in the debatesand discussions on this topic mustcontinue. Pulling away from the dis-cussion is not only a disservice tothose who are the voiceless, who arepersecuted, mocked, discriminatedagainst or even killed because oftheir religious convictions, but tothose who disagree with us. Theyalso need to understand the gravityof what is at stake. The Holy See,with its unique mission and accord-ing to its particular nature, utilizesthe diplomatic tools at its disposal,especially that of providing a sort of“moral compass”, in building reli-gious freedom and other fundament-al human rights among other Statesand within the family of nations.While the Holy See lacks the “cus-tomary” diplomatic tools employedby most States, it does have a richand long-standing body of socialteaching that has been developedover the centuries and which itbrings to the political and diplomat-ic discussion.

The commitment of the Holy Seein the defence and promotion of re-ligious liberty is guided by theteaching and engagement of PopeFrancis, who has continually stressedthe importance of dialogue and mu-tual understanding among peoplesand societies, among those of differ-ent religious convictions, or thosewithout, to work towards peacefulcoexistence and reciprocal respect.This is the heart of the message onthe Document on Human Fraternityof 4 February 2019 and will un-doubtedly be a prominent theme inthe Encyclical Letter “Fratelli tutti”which the Holy Father will release ina few days’ time.

In closing, I would like to cite aline from the Document on HumanFraternity: “This divine wisdom isthe source from which the right tofreedom of belief and the freedomto be different derives. Therefore,the fact that people are forced to ad-here to a certain religion or culturemust be rejected, as too the imposi-tion of a cultural way of life thatothers do not accept.”

I hope that discussions and ex-changes that take place here todaymay be productive, insightful andfacilitate the protection and promo-tion of religious liberty, which we allhold very dearly.

Thank you for your kind attention.

Religious and human freedomCONTINUED FROM PA G E 14

properly ordered to, namely, thediscovery of the ultimate truth ofone’s existence, one’s origin anddestiny, given by the Creator, islike giving a child a tool andtelling them “you should not usethis tool for such and such”, butnever explaining to them “whatpurpose that tool was intended toserve”.

If I am not mistaken, there is afamous series of catechetical book-lets, produced from the one of theCouncils of Baltimore in theUnited States. One of the initialquestions of that faith primer is:“Why did God make you?” andthe proper response to be given is“God made me to know Him, tolove Him, and to serve Him in thisworld, and to be happy with Himforever in the next.” The simplicityof this should not obfuscate theprofundity of this truth. We arecreated for a purpose. We have re-ceived a nature that is ordered to acertain end, with the gifts of intel-

lect and will to know and tochoose the good, each in accordwith one’s conscience. Without thisobjective end, an end that existsbeyond the self, we cannot hopebut to find society in crisis, witheach of us unable to embrace any-one but ourselves.

In our discussion of religiouslib erty, including its promotionthrough diplomatic activity, it re-mains useful for us to remembernot only what we hope to defendand promote but also the threatsthat we face. This certainly in-cludes physical oppression, perse-cution and ideological imposition,but it also includes the denying ofman’s very nature. I hope I havehelped to better illuminate thatpoint here with you today.

And, as always, it is my hopethat initiatives such as today’sSymposium might continue build-ing momentum on the internation-al level so that this fundamentalhuman right may be enjoyed byall.

Thank you for your attention.


ANGELUS

After reciting the Angelus with the faithful gathered inSaint Peter’s Square on Sunday, 27 September, theHoly Father launched a new appeal for peace in theCaucasus. Earlier, he had reflected on the day’s GospelReading on the parable of the two sons (Mt 21:28-32).The following is a translation of the Pope’s reflectionwhich he shared in Italian.

The path of dialogue and negotiationfor peace in the Caucasus

On World Day of Migrants and Refugees, the Pope prays for the people forced to flee like Jesus

Dear brothers and sisters,In my land we say: “A good facein bad weather”. With this “go o dface” I say Good Morning toyou.

With his preaching on theKingdom of God, Jesus opposesa religiosity that does not involvehuman life, that does not ques-tion the conscience and its re-sponsibility in the face of goodand evil. He also demonstratesthis with the parable of the twosons, which is offered to us in theGospel of Matthew (cf. 21:28-32).To the father’s invitation to goand work in the vineyard, thefirst son impulsively responds“no, I’m not going”, but then herepents and goes; instead thesecond son, who immediatelyreplies “yes, yes dad”, does notactually do so; he doesn’t go.Obedience does not consist insaying “yes” or “no”, but alwaysin taking action, in cultivating thevineyard, in bringing about theKingdom of God, in doing good.With this simple example, Jesuswants to go beyond a religion un-derstood only as an external andhabitual practice, which does notaffect people’s lives and attitudes,a superficial religiosity, merely“ritual”, in the ugly sense of thew o rd .

The exponents of this “façade”of religiosity, of which Jesus dis-approves, in that time were “thechief priests and the elders of thep eople” (Mt 21:23), who, accord-ing to the Lord’s admonition, willbe preceded in the Kingdom ofGod by “tax collectors and pros-titutes” (cf. v. 31). Jesus tellsthem: “the tax collectors, mean-ing the sinners, and the harlotsgo into the kingdom of God be-fore you”. This affirmation mustnot lead us to think that thosewho do not follow God’s com-mandments, those who do not

follow morality, saying, “In anycase, those who go to Church areworse than us”, do well. No, thisis not Jesus’ teaching. Jesus doesnot indicate publicans and prosti-tutes as models of life, but as“privileged by Grace”. And Iwould like to underscore thisword, “grace”. Grace. Becauseconversion is always a grace. Agrace that God offers to anyonewho opens up and converts tohim. Indeed, these people, listen-ing to his preaching, repentedand changed their lives. Let usthink of Matthew, for example.Saint Matthew, who was a publi-can, a traitor to his homeland.

In today’s Gospel, the one whomakes the best impression is thefirst brother, not because he said“no” to his father, but becauseafter his “no” he converted to“yes”, he repented. God is patientwith each of us: he does not tire,he does not desist after our “no”;he leaves us free even to distanceourselves from him and to makemistakes. Thinking about God’spatience is wonderful! How theLord always waits for us; he is al-ways beside us to help us; but herespects our freedom. And heanxiously awaits our “yes”, so asto welcome us anew in his fath-erly arms and to fill us with hisboundless mercy. Faith in Godasks us to renew every day thechoice of good over evil, thechoice of the truth rather thanlies, the choice of love for ourneighbour over selfishness. Thosewho convert to this choice, afterhaving experienced sin, will findthe first places in the Kingdom ofheaven, where there is greater joyfor a single sinner who repentsthan for ninety-nine righteouspeople (cf. Lk 15: 7).

But conversion, changing theheart, is a process, a process thatpurifies us from moral encrusta-tions. And at times it is a painful

process, because there is no pathof holiness without some sacrificeand without a spiritual battle.Battling for good; battling so asnot to fall into temptation; doingfor our part what we can, to ar-rive at living in the peace and joyof the Beatitudes. Today’s Gospelpassage calls into question theway of living a Christian life,which is not made up of dreamsand beautiful aspirations, but ofconcrete commitments, in orderto always open ourselves to God’swill and to love for our brothersand sisters. But this, even thesmallest concrete commitment,cannot be made without grace.Conversion is a grace we must al-ways ask for: “Lord, give me thegrace to improve. Give me thegrace to be a good Christian”.

May Mary Most Holy help usto be docile to the action of theHoly Spirit. He is the One whomelts the hardness of hearts anddisposes them to repentance, sowe may obtain the life and salva-tion promised by Jesus.

After the Angelus the Holy Fathercontinued:

Dear brothers and sisters, therehas been worrying news of con-flicts in the area of the Caucasus.I pray for peace in the Caucasusand I ask the parties in conflict toperform concrete acts of goodwill and brotherhood that maylead to resolve the problems, notwith the use of force and arms,but through dialogue and negoti-ation. Let us pray together in si-lence for peace in the Caucasus.

Yesterday in Naples, MariaLuigia of the Blessed Sacrament,in the world Maria Velotti, wasproclaimed Blessed; she was theFoundress of the Congregation ofFranciscan Sisters Adorers of theHoly Cross. Let us give thanks toGod for this new Blessed, an ex-

ample of contemplation of themystery of Calvary and tireless inthe exercise of charity.

Today the Church celebratesthe World Day of Migrants andRefugees. I greet the refugeesand migrants present in theSquare around the monument en-titled “Angels, unawares” (cf.Heb 13:2), which I blessed oneyear ago. This year I wished todedicate my Message to the in-ternally displaced, who are forcedto flee, as also happened to Jesusand his family. “Like Jesus, forcedto flee”, likewise the displaced,migrants. Our remembrance andour prayer go to them, in a par-ticular way, and to those who as-sist them.

Today is also World TourismDay. The pandemic has harshlystruck this sector that is so im-portant to many countries. I offermy encouragement to those whowork in tourism, particularlysmall family businesses andyoung people. I hope that every-one may soon pick themselves upagain from the current diffi-culties.

And I now greet you, dearfaithful of Rome and pilgrimsfrom various parts of Italy andthe world. There are so many dif-ferent flags! I offer a specialthought to women and to all thepeople committed in the fightagainst breast cancer. May theLord sustain your commitment!And I greet the pilgrims from Si-ena who have come to Rome onfo ot.

And I wish you all a happySunday, a peaceful Sunday.Please, do not forget to pray forme. Enjoy your lunch. Ar r i v e d e rc i .

Date post:	11-Oct-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

OL’ S S E RVATOR E ROMANO · ing to his preaching, repented and changed their lives. Let us think...

Documents