“The Church is for everyone”, said Pope Francis on his 10th anniversary as leader of Catholicism

The mere entrance of Pope Francis into the meeting room of the Domus Sanctae Marthae, in the Vatican, refutes all speculation about his health: he walks with a normal, even brisk gait. He will later talk about the circumstances that forced him to use a wheelchair until recently, with the same nonchalant manner with which he will address all the topics presented to him in this interview, without dodging any.

From Russia’s criminal invasion of Ukraine to celibacy and divorce.

From the “uncouth dictatorships” in Latin America to death and the possibility of seeing it coming.

Also the resistance he faced when promoting change in the church, his habit of handwriting, market capitalism, his desire to visit Argentina despite the difficulties. About everything.

He has served 10 years as Pope but believes that he has not changed in essence. In fact, he still has the same attitude as always, the Buenos Aires Spanish idioms, the slightly candid humor. Francis looks at the team of Infobae that has set up the cameras and smiles: perhaps the sight of Argentine faces makes him feel closer to home, soothes that nostalgia of wandering —so he says— through the streets of Buenos Aires.

To his right there is a reproduction of Our Lady Undoer of Knots, a painting by Johann Schmidtner from 1700, which Francis, when he was Jorge Mario Bergoglio in the eighties, discovered while completing his PhD dissertation in Germany. He fell in love with its emblem — an angel hands her a ribbon full of knots, which becomes undone as it passes through her hands— and introduced her in Argentina.

It is not a traditional virgin; it does not represent a manifestation of Mary, like the Virgin of the Pillar, the Virgin of Fatima or the Guadalupana. A priest asked Schmidtner to paint an image to hearten a couple of friends who were about to split up. And to her Francis entrusted himself when the covid-19 pandemic began: an inspiration to face hard times with hope. Before the interview, he briefly gazed at the picture.

—It’s now ten years since the day you were appointed Pope. I would like to know if you have any memories of that day. What comes to your mind first?

—Several times I wanted to remember what happened then. I didn’t really realize what was going to take place. “What, didn’t you have a vote?” Yes, many of us there had votes, but in the conclave there is this “deposit vote”. Sometimes you don’t know who to vote for and so you wait a bit, and give [your vote] to someone you know will not be elected, and see how things go. It is the way the Holy Spirit leads you, isn’t it?

In the morning, at noon, I came here, I was relaxed, some people made jokes as I was passing, which I did not understand. Even when I entered the dining room, some bishops from central Europe said to me “Come here, Eminence, what can you tell us about Latin America?”. They tested me. I had seen it before. As I was leaving the dining room, a cardinal comes running from the back and says “Just a moment, please, is it true that you had a lung removed?”. I told him “No, I had the right upper lobe removed, because I had cysts”. “Oh, and when was that?” And I said “In 1957″. And he said “These last-minute ploys…” and then turned away. In that moment it dawned on me. That’s when I realized there was a campaign for and against [me]. I left, I took a nap, calmed.

Another exciting memory is that when I arrived —and this is what the psychologists would call the dishonest unconscious mind—, before entering the Sistine [Chapel], I ran into cardinal Ravasi, and we started walking through the big hall in front of the Sistine [Chapel]. And I told him, “Do you know that for my sapiental classes I work —I worked, now I don’t teach anymore— with your books?”. And I began to explain, and we began to talk about sapiential books, and we drifted away until we heard a shout, “Are you coming or not? Because I am closing the door”. Unconsciously you do not want to go inside. But those are matters you can’t control.

—Was it very different from the 2005 election?

—No. No, no. The dynamics are the same, the dynamics are the same. This one went through one more round of vote. [In] the 2005 [election, he] was elected on the first ballot in the afternoon. [In] this one, on the second in the afternoon. The first one already showed the trend.

And here I want to pay tribute to a great friend, cardinal [Claudio] Hummes, who was sitting behind me and in the first round of vote came closer to say “Do not be afraid, this is how the Holy Spirit works”. I get emotional because he passed away not long ago, and I loved him dearly. And when I was elected in the second ballot —I got two thirds and the counting was still going on— he stood up, hugged me and told me “Do not forget the poor”. This is moving. A great guy, Hummes, a great man. A great man. He passed away a few months ago. Silent [man], but he led the way. Well, the poor, you know, St Francis. Francis, that’s it. So, when cardinal [Giovanni Battista] Re asked me “What will your name be?”, I said Francis. Period.

—Holy Father, can I ask you if you found out —I guess you did— those who were campaigning against you at that time?

—No.

—No.

—No, honestly no. I do not know if there was a counter-campaign. I don’t know. Obviously, there were others who voted for other people. It is true that in the end it was almost… I wouldn’t say unanimous, but quite big. In the end it was a massive vote. But against, no, I could not think of anyone. And [if] I turn to imagine it I run the risk of committing libel, so I’d rather not. [Laughs.]

—I have read El pastor [The Shepherd], the book by Sergio Rubin and the Italian journalist Francesca Ambrogetti, and it says that God always forgives, and that you forgive a lot but you do not forget those who offended you or defamed you. And perhaps I imagined, or I assumed that it was referring to…

—No, not at all. No. It didn’t occur to me to think about who didn’t vote for me. It really didn’t occur to me. I did not vote for myself, that’s for sure. But about the others, I don’t know.

—Many people who have known you for years sometimes tell me that you look much happier since you are Pope. Do you feel the same way?

—I have always been happy with my ministry, even in the tough moments, difficult moments, which I went through, because I had to solve quite thorny matters, o help to solve them, but nobody could take away my inner peace. That happiness. You can tell that people now look at me more but I have always been like this, I do not think I have changed here. Perhaps I feel a little nostalgic for Buenos Aires, because I can’t wander around like I did in Buenos Aires. But I wouldn’t be able to measure the quietness, the peacefulness, the inner joy I have. For me it has always been the same.

Of all the gates to enter the Vatican City, the Perugino Gate is the closest to Domus Sanctae Marthae, where Francis, dressed in white and wearing black shoes, greeted Infobae. It is a gate confusing to tourists: it is renowned for its location in the walls of the ancient city, for the frescoes by Pietro Perugino that give it its name and for being a pathway to St Peter’s Basilica, but it operates as a private entrance.

The reason why is simple: Francis chose not to live in the Apostolic Palace, the official residence of the popes, but in Sanctae Marthae. That is to say, that cobblestone protrusion of the Via della Stazione Vaticana, which ends at a gray and inconspicuous gate, is the entrance to the Supreme Pontiff’s home.

Francis decided to make this move in search of a simpler lifestyle, as he stated. It was not the only change, not even the most relevant, of a papacy probably defined by promoting new ideas for the Catholic Church.

—You travelled to Brazil in 2013 and on you way back a Brazilian TV journalist asked you about the gay lobby, and you said “I am not the one [to talk about it]”. First you denied that there was a gay lobby, you said it could be part of different lobbies, but [then] you said “I am not the one to judge anyone”. Sexual choice or preference aside, someone who has complied with the rest of the Church mandates, would be fit to receive communion? Or let me rephrase: would you administer communion to this person?

—What I said… I have said three things regarding people with homosexual tendencies. One in Brazil, the one you cite, and this is the way I said it: “If a person of homosexual tendency is honest and seeks God, who I am to judge?” On a trip back from Ireland I said —I was asked and I said—: “I ask parents, if they have a son or a daughter with homosexual tendencies, to keep them at home, not to cast them away as a punishment. Attend to them”. The third [one] was in an interview with the Associated Press in which I talked about criminalization. Criminalization is a serious problem. About thirty countries have criminalized this in one way or another. And almost ten [have] death penalty. Almost ten.

Those were the three times I spoke publicly about the subject. Jesus provided the greatest answer: everybody. All of them. Everybody comes inside. The snobbish don’t want to assist to the banquet? Go there, to the crossroads, and summon everyone: the good, the bad, the old, the young, the kids. All of them. The church is for everyone. And each one settles their stance before the Lord with the strength they have. This is a church of sinners. I do not know where the church of saints is; here, we are all sinners. And who am I to judge a person, if they have good will? If they belong to the devil’s gang, well, let’s defend them a little bit. But nowadays we focus a lot on this problem. I think we must resort to the essence of the Gospel. Jesus invites everyone and each one settles their relationship with God as they can or as they want. Sometimes you want but you cannot, but the Lord always awaits.

—I have friends of my generation that are on their so-called second administration, their second marriage, and they are very happy. They married too young or maybe it didn’t work well. And they have children, and maybe they send them to Catholic schools, or Catholics universities. And many times, they have doubted about being fit to receive communion. Could you help me understand?

—Yes. We cannot narrow down a human situation to a preceptive one. Pope Benedict —who knew about these matters and was a great theologian, he did not fiddle in theology, he was knowledgeable— he said three times, once in Alto Adige, another time in Piamonte and the third one in Rome, that a great number of marriages in the church are not valid due to a lack of faith. And look, sometimes you go to a wedding and it seems to be more a social gathering than a sacrament. In other words, they get married, yes, [but] when these young people say forever, who knows what they mean by forever. While the good vibes last, I don’t know. And Benedict said that because of that lack of consciousness a great number are not valid. You have to take that into account. A very wise lady once told me: “You priests are very smart. To be ordained priests you have to spend six, seven years in the Seminary. In contrast, we, to marry, which is for life —because a priest can leave the Church, while for us is a life deal—, we are fixed with four lectures”. Very wise. That is why we always speak of a catechumenate towards marriage and the first years of marriage.

I come back to this, so as not to fall under the discipline of communion, [for] people that the marriage is invalid. Maybe they cannot prove it, and that is where the bishop’s conscience comes in. I advise separated couples to approach their bishop, to go and submit their situation to him.

—I said that it was the last [question] regarding theological matters or church matters, and I was wrong, I did not lie to you. But nowadays there is some talk, and I do not know the numbers, that there are not a lot of vocation. Or maybe there is, but it is not voiced. But regardless of that, if celibacy was not mandatory —not that celibacy disappears but if it were not mandatory— do you suppose that the possibility of priests with the faculty to be married, as is the case in other churches, might help to encourage more people to join the priesthood?

—I do not think so. In fact there are married priests in the Catholic church, the whole eastern ritual has marriage. The whole eastern ritual. Here in the Curia we have one —just today I came across him— who has his wife, his son, [and he] comes [here]. In the western church, celibacy is a temporary prescription, I do not know if it is settled in one way or another, but it is temporary in this sense, it is not perpetual like priestly ordination, which is forever, whether you like it or not. Whether you leave [the church] or not is a different matter, but it is forever. Celibacy, on the other hand, is a discipline...

—In other words, it could be reconsidered.

—Yes. Yes. In fact everyone in the eastern church is married. Or those who want to. They make a choice. Before being ordained, the opt to marry or to be celibate.

The Catholic church of the future will carry the imprint of Francis. We already see some of that: the austerity of his former office as archbishop of Buenos Aires has infused the Vatican atmosphere, and some of the traditional circles have lost privileges. In the industrious balance that defines this work, the Pope has achieved an important triumph facing the coming times: he has appointed half of the cardinals who are currently electors.

However, it is known that his papacy is not a smooth experience. He has been criticized since March 13, 2013, the day he was elected and promised to open wide the doors of Catholicism to let in all those who wish to join the community. Some of those criticisms have been constructive and others not so much, he differentiates. To talk about both, he slightly accommodates himself in the armchair and lightly touches the metallic crucifix over his chest.

—Holy Father, did you sense at the beginning —I don’t know if know— any resistance, from the church or from the bishops in Rome, to some of the ideas or changes you promoted?

—Resistance, as [Sandro] Pertini, that great Italian president, said… He always talked about resistance. And I called him the chufi-chufi, the [device] that heats the water with a resistor… Resistance is a sort of ever-present self-defense stance in the face of anything new, anything at all. I would be suspicious of decisions without any resistance. Of that I would be suspicious. There may be some obvious [decisions], but if they don’t meet any resistance the thing was too oiled, it doesn’t work. Resistance is very normal. I would be suspicious of a Congress, for instance, where they do not fight each other. Without a diversity of views. That they resist themes of the Executive and vote against them. A passive Congress is not a Congress, it is an elementary school, or even less.

—I am going to read verbatim because it seems to me that each word is strong, and this was said by Julian Herranz, who I believe is the oldest cardinal in the Vatican.

—A great guy.

—He has been here, in the Vatican, for about sixty years. And he said, word by word: “I have worked for six popes and all of them have been criticized. Of the six pontiffs, maybe the devil has been merciless with two, Paul VI and Francis. Always to divide the church and hinder the spread of the Gospel”. How do you feel about it?

—Herranz is an experienced man. Herranz is a medical doctor, then he joined the Opus Dei, he was ordained a priest. He is ninety-two years old. Just the other day he wrote me a very nice letter. I am very close to Herranz, very friendly. Very close friend. I did not know he had ever said this. I cannot judge if it true or not. But sometimes there is resistance but of the wrong kind. Not the right kind. Because the right resistance is that if I have a good project, let’s take a look, let it be discussed. The wrong resistance is when you discuss over here and [then] you go in the back looking for betrayal as well. But either I am naïve or I don’t care about that.

The [resistance] that existed has been solved. And if there is one, it is in a corner, hiding, and those who support it talk about it. [When those get us] On the verge of schism, that is the bad thing. For example, the story of the American bishop, one that is over there, who was a nuncio. You can’t tell if this man is Catholic or not, he’s just on the edge Those mismanaged resistances, right? From the beginning there was resistance in the church. When St Paul tells “and I confronted Peter and I told him that he was a devious guy, that he did not talk much”… Devious is a word as if he were two-faced, right? “And why did he pretend with the Jews that he did not eat meat, and with us he did? I confronted him”. That is not resistance: that helps the government. When they criticize me head-on, I am grateful for it. Sometimes I don’t like it, but I am grateful.

—Has a cardinal told you not to do so many interviews?

—Yes, one.

—One.

—How do you know this?

—Well, it’s my job [laughs]. It’s my job.

—One, two months ago.

In the hour he spent with Infobae, the Pope not only shared his profound ideas and definitions. He also revealed his habits, the small repeated actions that weave each day, including his mannerisms such as his aversion to cell phones. But even when he talks about these lesser details, mere colorful facts of life, his religious passion shines through.

He seems to be happy doing what he does. At 86 years of age, there is nothing left of the chemistry technician who thought about the possibility of studying medicine. Compared to himself 10 years ago, the Francis of 2023 comes out on top: he looks more mature, serene and balanced. And his mental quickness still sets the pace of his conversation.

—I am going to ask you something —don’t take this the wrong way— about your daily life. I see you walking just fine, but a few months ago I spotted you in pictures in a wheelchair. Could you tell us what happened?

­—It was a somewhat strange thing. My tendons were hurting due to inflammation, it seems, and I was walking poorly. And that improper gait broke a small bone in my knee. My doctor told me “You need surgery”. I said “Again? It requires anesthesia, and six hours of procedure”. A year and some months ago… And the anesthesia takes two or three years to wear off. The effects. “No, but it is local”, he tells me. “What, are you going to pour some distilled water in there?” So I said no. And the physiotherapist told me “No, this can be healed with magnetotherapy, laser and a little physiotherapy”. And he succeeded in getting the bone to weld. Now I’m going through rehabilitation for all that, that is to say, stretching the tendons, the muscles. The bone is fine. That’s what happened.

—How many hours a day do you sleep?

—Six. From 10 a 4. After lunch, a half hour.

—A nap.

—Yes, half an hour.

—In the book El pastor you mentioned that you haven’t watched TV since 1990. May I ask why?

—Yes, July 15th, 1990. I was with the community, watching TV, and some stuff came up that is not good for your heart. Not sinful stuff, but those relativisms that gradually weaken the heart. I stood up because I didn’t like it, and I left. I was very disquiet, I do not know why I left if it wasn’t a big deal. The following day —that was July 15th at night—, the following day, during the mass for Our Lady of Mount Carmel, I felt I did not have to watch [TV], period. I said “Enough” and made this promise. It’s not a completely immovable matter. For instance, when a president takes office, when I was in Argentina and one of them took office, I watched TV. When that planed crashed at Aeroparque [LAPA flight 3142, in August 1999] I also watched TV. I allow myself a few little things but [I keep it] short, short. In general, however, I do not watch [TV], not at all. I do not watch [TV].

—When the Argentine National Team played in the World Cup did you watch it?

—I did not, I was in a meeting, here, with six Alitalia pilots and their wives. I was at a meeting here. At some point I left to get something and when I came back, one of them told me “They’re winning 3 to 0″, o 2 to 0, or 3 to 1, I don’t remember. And that’s fine, I said, but that left me thinking about something, that I allow myself to say with no offense because I am Argentine as well, but it somehow [reflects] a bit our idiosyncrasy.

In both matches, the one against the Netherlands and the finale, they start winning 2 to 0, 3 to 1; ah, the Argentines are all happy; we move to the second half and they end up winning both by a penalty kick. By chance. We Argentines are like that: we start everything with enthusiasm and we have the habit —I don’t know, at least I have it— of leaving things halfway through. And we kind of give up before time, or we win before time. In the positive or in the negative. It’s hard for us to get to the final shape of things. This is my thinking based on these two objective facts.

—You told me earlier that you missed wandering around Buenos Aires city. What else, if anything, do you miss about Argentina?

—That is essential because it kept me in touch with the people all the time, and that is true diversity. Things that remain in my mind and that sometimes changed my ways. When I had to take the bus that ran past the Devoto Penitentiary —I had to go to a parish in [the neighborhood called] Devoto—, this happened to me several times: I was waiting in line and almost all of the people waiting were mothers. Almost all of them were mothers. So, I always thought about the mother of an inmate: what that woman feels, what that son feels. And that fostered within me a certain closeness to the detainees. Every year for Holy Thursday I go to a prison to wash feet.

And by the way, I want to say something that I found out here. The male prison wardens are very good here. They are very good. But the women are better. A female warden, I don’t know how she does it, but she has an ability to manage, an ability to be close [to the inmates]. You feel a different atmosphere in a prison run by a woman than in one run by a man. Although the men’s prison is doing very well.

For example, just the other day I had six inmates from a prison in a province of Italy that wanted to visit me, and they came with the warden, and a judge and a policeman were with them. Here, six inmates were in a meeting with me. So, the male warden was very good. But the female warden is much better because, I don’t know, it’s the motherliness, it’s the way… I have some stories about this, of course. Every Holy Thursday I go there, so I see great diversity.

—Many more women are working at the Vatican.

—Yes. And that’s necessary. Male chauvinism is bad. And sometimes celibacy can lead to machismo. A priest who doesn’t know how to work with women is lacking something. He is not mature. The Vatican was very sexist. But it’s part of the culture, it’s nobody’s fault. It was always done that way. Today more [women] work [here]. For instance, the Council of Economy is made up of six cardinals and six laypeople. The laypeople are all men, of course. It was necessary to renew and I appointed one man and five women. This is how things changed. We had to appoint a deputy governor in the Vatican. The governor is the cardinal, he is 80 and... No, he is 78 or so. Cardinal [Fernando] Berges, a Spaniard, very capable. He had been secretary to Msgr [Eduardo] Pironio. A very experienced man. And instead of appointing a male deputy governor, I appointed a female deputy governor. And he feels a lot more supported because they deliver; women deliver, and they do it well.

On one occasion I was visited by a head of government of the highest level, a mother and a professional, a professional who later entered politics and is doing well. And I asked her how she had managed to solve a very tough conflict in her district. Nobody had been able to solve it, and she managed to do it. The answer was this, I think it can help a lot, she is a woman. She looked at me, silence. “As we moms do”. What she meant, I don’t know, but “as we moms do” settled the matter. Women have a different method. Their sense of time, of awaiting, of patience, is unlike men’s. This does not diminish men, they are different. And they have to complement each other.

—Is it true that you don’t have a cell phone?

—I have never had one.

—Never.

—When they made me a bishop they gave me one, in 1994, 1992, which at that time was [like] a shoe. It was like that. I said “I will never use this”. “Well, make a phone call”. There, next to the person who gave it to me, I called my sister: “How are you doing?”. Bang, I hung up. I gave it back to him. And never again.

And that grants me great freedom. Because I keep track of everything. You have my number and call, and I call you later. That is to say, for mi is not an inconvenience. Of course, I admit that my secretaries have cell phones.

—That means you don’t check out Twitter, Instagram, Facebook.

—No, not that world.

—But somebody tells you about it.

—Yes, yes, I am up to date. And I write by hand.

—Wait, what?

—When I was a student in Germany, I bought a typewriter in one of those Angebot [garage sale] the German have, for 45 marks. On Fridays, they get rid of as much as they can. I became fond of it, a one-line memory [typewriter]. I brought it with me to Buenos Aires and I used it until I came here, and that’s where it stayed. And then I took up [writing] by hand.

—How do you send emails?

—What do you mean?

—An email, how do you send an email.

—By hand.

—But to pass it to someone.

—And I give it to the secretary, and he sends it. Yes, everything by hand. You may have seen how I handle some of them. Note that I don’t want to say this is better than the other, no. It is a limitation I have, let’s say an impairment.

—When was the last time you took a vacation?

—In 1975. Let’s see, I’m getting confused here. Yes. Isabel was overthrown in 1976, right?

—Yes, on March 24th.

—There was talk about a military coup coming in 1976, and in 1975, in Mar del Plata, with the community… the community had a place in Mar del Plata, and I was there with the community. In 1976 I said “look, there’s talk of a coup, I do not want to leave this alone”, I was [a] provincial [minister] at that time. “So go back”. Besides I was getting ready to move the provincial Curia to San Miguel. And precisely on that day, March 24th, the moving took place. I stayed at home. And thus, I got a taste for a different kind of vacation. Reading more, listening to music, praying more, getting more rest. And in the end, I liked that style. And it is what I always do.

—Holy Father, do you pray at a particular time? In your room, at the chapel? Where do you pray?

—In the morning I celebrate mass right away, if I don’t have mass outside. That is, at six o’clock am I hold mass. Before that, I pray a little bit and after that too, right? I get up at four o’clock, at five o’clock I am already praying, there, in my room. At 5:50 I go to the chapel and there I celebrate mass. Generally alone or with a priest who comes and keeps me company, and that helps me: when there is another priest, I get more help, don’t I? And then I start my day.

Many skills are needed to be a Pope, but perhaps one of the job requirements is the most noticeable: you have to know how to wear three different hats. When speaking with Francis, sometimes you hear the pastor, sometimes you hear the voice of the Supreme Pontiff and sometimes you hear a Head of State.

This also reveals the range of subjects that concern him: one day he has to say something sensitive about death and the next day he has to discuss the criminal Russian invasion of Ukraine. In his conversation with Infobae he dealt with these issues, refuted the preconceptions that portray him as an anti-capitalist and condemned -almost always in a diplomatic, cautious tone- all dictatorial populisms.

—I am going to read you four very short statements you made, and you tell me if I arranged them correctly and if I understand them correctly. “I am not condemning capitalism”, “I am not against the market”, “In no way it is wrong to create wealth for the benefit of all”, “That who generates jobs should be recognized”. Is that correct?

—Correct.

—Why some media or some figures see you as someone who maybe is not in favor of capitalism?

—They have ideological biases and label people before listening to them. Listen to them, then speak. The biggest step in capitalism was taken by St John Paul II who spoke of social market economy. Market capitalism. He nuanced it as something licit, not bad in itself. The opposite would be the depersonalizing communism. Both are depersonalizing, but a social market economy —that little word, social, that St John Paul II chose— I think is the one that matches the ideas of the church. Later on, much progress was made. But that definition drew attention at its time.

—Next question deals with something that every human being knows it is going to happen, and we never know when, which is death. Are you, the highest authority in the church, afraid to die?

—No. I know it will come. Once, when I thought there could be a risk, I prepared myself, when I had to undergo a surgery that was risky. But I asked the Lord not to take me when I was not conscious, not in that way. [To] Let me at least see it coming. They say that the fear of death is rare, that the fear is to see death coming. So I had to see it coming to understand the end.

—Luis Novaresio, an Argentine journalist that carries out very intimate interviews, always asks the same final question. He says: “We die, and then what?” What do you think happens next?

—A very bright light, a huge happiness. A grand encounter, on the path of encountering God. Some diehards out there think that… or maybe they do not see that path. But I believe that God waits and assists until the very last moment. There is a very beautiful medieval capital in the cathedral of Vézelay, I don’t know if it is from the 10th or 11th century, in the South of France, Vézelay. The capital is very beautiful. On one side there is Judas hanging and the devil pulling him down. On the other side is the good shepherd dragging him away with an ironic smile. That is the drama: who wins in the end. And this one wins. Always.

—I’m going to take you to harsher topics, international topics, and here I think the question is no longer for the pastor but for the Head of State, who will be able to answer me the best he can. But knowing you I imagine your enormous concern for what begun a little more than a year ago, so close from here, which is the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the amount of war crimes that are being committed. The bombing of the civilian population in Ukraine has been impressive. I know that at the beginning, or before the beginning, of the Russian invasion, your diplomacy made calls, efforts... Do you talk to [Volodimir] Zelenski, have you ever talked to [Vladimir] Putin during this period?

—Not during this period. I spoke with the Russian ambassador, a very honorable person, excellent [person]. And I was there once, he came here several times. He is an excellent person. I received a very correct reply from [Sergei] Lavrov to my request to go to visit Putin, that yes, of course, but later on. But I did not [talk to] Putin after the war [broke]. Before that, he came here three times. He is an educated person, very educated.

—Do you foresee a solution in the short term?

—Everybody is working on this. Everybody is working. [Narendra] Modi may do something, I don’t know. I am aware that a number of leaders are making progress. There is an Israeli group that is moving well. But we don’t know how it can end up. Working for peace... I would like to highlight one point about the war.

This war is very painful for us because it happens next to us, but the world has always been at war. At least for the last century. We forget Yemen, for example. The children of Yemen. We forget about the Rohingya, Myanmar, all that war drama. We forget about Goma, in northern Congo, and Rwanda. Of course, since this war takes place in a nearby neighborhood, we are already close to it. That’s why it catches our attention. But we do not stop waging war.

A serious person, an academic, a very serious professor, told me once: “Look, if we didn’t manufacture weapons for one year, we would end hunger in the world”. The weapon industry is impressive. Four years ago, I think, a shipment of weapons bound for Yemen arrived in Genoa from another country in Europe, on a fairly small ship, not very large, in order to be transferred to a larger ship that was going to Yemen. And the dockworkers didn’t want to load it. A gesture. But it’s nothing. The weapon industry is impressive. Well, I was told this: when an empire feels weak, it needs a war to get stronger. And also, a war to sell the weapons it possesses and to test new weapons. Someone says —I don’t know if it’s true— that some weapons for the II World War were tested in the Spanish Civil War. But there is always something of the order of testing new weapons.

I think the world has always been at war. We have been at war for a century, if we do not to go back further. From 1914 to 1919 there was one; 1939 to 1945, another one. And this one. But one after the other. On the 60th anniversary, I think it was, of the Normandy Landings, all the heads of government got together to pay tribute, and they made me look at the pictures. But we often forget that there were 30,000 young men left on the beach. I think of the mother who receives the letter: “Madam, we congratulate you and I have the honor to inform you that your son is a hero”. But her son is no more. Every November 2nd I celebrate mass in a cemetery. Once I went to the Anzio Cemetery, which is the famous American landing here, near Rome. American cemetery. I was scanning the graves: nineteen, twenty, twenty-two years old. That’s war.

On a trip to Romania and Slovakia, I had to drive through several villages because they couldn’t use a helicopter and because that was the way. And the people knew at what time we were passing, because they know these things on the radio right away. And in the villages they were waiting outside, in front of the houses, to say hello. Kids, young people, young couples, everybody. But among the old ones, there were only old women. And where are the old men? They are not here. They were left behind in the war of 39/45.

—My last three questions concern Latin America. The UN Bachelet Report mentions rapes, electric shocks, political prisoners, enforced disappearance of people. Perhaps it reminded me of the dark night Argentina went through during the military dictatorship, but forty years later. Do you foresee any hope that the Venezuelan regime can be modified?

—I think so. I think so because the historical circumstances are going to force them to change the type of dialogue they have. I think so. In other words, I never close the doors to possible solutions. On the contrary, I encourage it.

—The second one is about Nicaragua. At first it seemed that they targeted only the opposition or those who thought differently; in fact they have just sent 222 opponents into exile. But I can also see a really fierce attack against the Catholic church. They have expelled the nuncio, now they are banning Holy Week processions. And [there’s] this remark by the president about the bishops, the priests, the popes being a mob. What do you think about this?

—With great respect, I have no other choice but to think that the person in power [Daniel Ortega] is mentally unbalanced. We have an incarcerated bishop there, a very responsible man, a very capable man. He wanted to testify and did not accept exile. This is something that is out of line with what we are currently experiencing; it is like bringing back the 1917 communist dictatorship, or the 1935 Hitlerite dictatorship, bringing those back… They are a type of crass dictatorships. Or, to use a nice Argentinean expression, guarangas. Uncouth.

—The last one regarding Latin America is about drug trafficking. It has taken over states, it has penetrated governments from Mexico down to the South. Argentina is going through a horrible experience in Rosario, and perhaps in other areas where there is not so much coverage or publicity. Several trends of thought view decriminalization or legalization of drug use as a possible solution —and I say possible because I am not familiar. Do you believe that?

—No, I don’t think so in principle. To tell you the truth, I have not delved into that matter. But to me it seems like... I am offering a crass example, hand in hand, right? Like the son who beats his mother and well, to remedy the problem we are going to change the whip, so that it is not so harmful, and we are going to give him a softer whip. These is about destruction. The problem of drugs is the destruction of the person, of the mind. You destroy yourself. It is self-destruction.

—My last two questions. The first one is just human: if you ever cry and, if so, when was the last time you remember crying.

—Yes, from time to time I cry in secret. Once I was in public and I couldn’t hold back the tears, it was because of the war. I was making a speech and this came out of me and I couldn’t repress it. But in secret. Let the psychiatrists do the interpretation [laughs], I don’t analyze myself. Sometimes I express myself in this way, alone.

—I watched the soccer finale. I am not living in Argentina, I am living in the US, but I expressly traveled to Argentina because I wanted to see, would Argentina win, the celebrations. And it was a marvelous moment of catharsis for a long-suffering society. When I talk with friends, sometimes I hear —and many people say so— that something similar could happen if Pope Francis visits Argentina. Have you thought about it? Have you dreamt about it? Do we have that chance?

—I have thought about it. I have. It was planned for December 1917. First we would go to Chile and then to Argentina and Uruguay. That was the plan. But what happened? That [Michelle] Bachelet was leaving office and the elections would take place precisely at that time. So we had to switch Chile to December and then we would be going to Argentina and Uruguay in January. In January no one stays home [it’s the summer vacation in the south], right? So we changed the schedule and we did Chile and Perú. And Argentina and Uruguay were left for a later moment. And that later moment we are still waiting for, the circumstances. In other words, there is no refusal to go, no, not at all. The trip was planned. I am open to the opportunity.

—What would that depend on?

—Thousands of factors. Thousands of factors.

—Can I ask you for two or three?

—First, the willingness to have me go. I think that is there. Second, the socio-political situation. Sometimes the visit of a pope can be exploited, anywhere. It should not be used in favor of one sector or the other, right?

—It could happen after an election.

—It could happen. After an election, it certainly could. That is why in electoral times we do not travel through countries, to avoid our presence being exploited by the ruling party for reelection or something like that, right? I want to go to Argentina. I want to. But…

—Would you venture to offer a range, how long could it be?

—No. I don’t know because these things are set up there. But it was certainly planned. And if we didn’t go it was because of the month, you know?

—First and foremost, I am grateful for the time you have given me.

—Thank you for the patience to listen to a priest. Please pray for me.

—Thank you very much.

—[Pray] in favor, not against, ok?