«In Catalonia the Church cannot make propaganda for one side or the other»

You are aware that in Spain one of the historical clichés of a certain sector of the left has been anti-clericalism, which is recurrent, for instance, in their calls for a revision of the concordat.

The term «anti-clericalism» is used ambiguously, and I want to be precise here. Clericalism is a deformity, a serious disease, it's a sin rather than a defect. In this light, being anti-clerical is an honour. But I understand that by «anti-clericalism» you are referring to the rejection of everything that is in any way related to religion.

Exactly.

When I read about some of the events of the Spanish Civil War, it was not just anti-clericalism. What evil had been done by those poor nuns that they tore apart and tortured? Those historical facts betray a true hatred of faith, of Christendom. But let us not forget that there was excess on both sides. Unfortunately, on the other side they weren't exactly throwing holy water on their enemies.

Spaniards, during the Transition, put forth a great effort towards reconciliation, but not oblivion, to overcome the terrible errors of the past. Forty years later, many of the grandchildren of those Spaniards seem intent on reopening the wounds.

I wish to be prudent here, but regarding this episode of history it seems that Spain has not yet recovered. They keep raising the spectre. In that period of overcoming, Spain had a very valuable president, Adolfo Suárez, who assisted in carrying forth the Transition. I watched closely then, and I think it was a good time. I regret that they should bring back the division. In any case, I receive people on the right and people on the left. If they come here, I will receive them. I'm not shutting the door on anyone.

Do you receive many visits?

Here I have welcomed communists, socialists, practising Catholics, people from parties in the centre, democrats... And when the head of the Spanish government came here with members of his cabinet, I greeted him live for all of Spain to see right then how I greeted him.

We are starting to believe that it will be nearly impossible to have Francis pay a visit to Spain.

My first choice was to visit the smaller countries in Europe. I haven't gone to any of the larger European countries. I did go to Strasbourg, but not because of France, merely to visit some of the European Union institutions. Perhaps next year I'll go to Marseille for the Mediterranean Worlds Forum, but it won't be to visit France.

And how about a trip to Melilla?

I hadn't thought about that.

You made some statements on Spain that stirred up a great deal of confusion and misinterpretations, when you said you would come «when there was peace and agreement,» coinciding with the threat of secession in Catalonia. Who were you referring to, Spaniards at large, their politicians, the Spanish church?

I think it was something I said on the whim, an informal reply in the aisle of the plane. I don't remember to whom I was referring... but I meant everyone. That includes the Spanish church, which is Spanish and it is Spain.

How satisfied are you with the Spanish Church in following the major lines of your pontificate?

They are good bishops, they are shepherds, and if there are one or two black sheep, well, there's one in every family. But I'm content, I can speak clearly to them.

But do you think the impulse is sufficient?

I would say it generally is. The other day the seminarians from Catalonia came here and I saw normal men, with serious concerns. They were not silly young men. With these seminarians, things are going well. Spain is forging ahead. There are issues, just like anywhere else. We had to ask a bishop or two to leave, but it happens in every country. The president of the episcopate (Cardinal Juan José Omella) should be shown respect, he is a worthy man.

Now that you mention Catalonia, what role should the Church play in this matter?

Spain is not the only case in the world. Each country must trod its own path in history to overcome these issues. There is not one single solution. Some areas obtained preferential statutes to solve these issues and in others there were partitions, with a new country arising. Is now the time for a definitive solution of Catalonia? I don't know. That is for you to decide among yourselves. A couple of years ago we witnessed the courage of two prime ministers to solve the issue in Macedonia and in North Macedonia. In Italy we have an area in the north, Trentino-Alto Adigio, with a statute of its own, where they speak German and Italian.... The English had a very «English» solution for the demands made by the Scots.

Catalonia already enjoys a very extensive legal autonomy and the problem is that a very large part of the population rejects the secessionist movement.

There's nothing original about that problem. It's something that has happened throughout history and in contemporary history, and many times in other countries they managed to solve it either fully or partially. It may take years or decades to solve this. But find a way to solve it.

Should the Church play a role, or should it stay out of it?

The Church must be incarnate. If the Church is not incarnate it is not going well, it has to accompany its people. What the Church cannot do is rally with one side or the other; it must accompany the people to find a final solution.

That has caused problems sometimes, with priests cheering on for independence. Even in the Basque Country in times past there were priests who provided cover for terrorism.

Unfortunately, when a priest loses the bearings of what his true identity is he can drift over to politics. When a priest crosses over to politics, it's not good... You are a shepherd. You have to help people to make good choices. You are there to accompany, not to do politics. If politics is your game, step down as a priest and move into politics.

In what ways can Spain and Latin America cooperate better at this stage in history?

I don't know how, but I do know that when it comes to cooperating with Europe, Spain is there first and foremost, no doubt. For Latin America, Spain is still the Motherland. Immigration from Italy or Yugoslavia is not the same as immigration from Spain. Spaniards arrived in America with their heels on the ground in the best way. That is something to be recovered.

Spain is pained by the negative reinterpretation of the history of the Discovery of America.

Hermeneutics, when it comes to reinterpreting historical events, have to be that of the period concerned, not that of the present. It is obvious there were people killed there, it is obvious that people were exploited, but the Indians also had killings among them. The atmosphere of war was not a Spanish export. The conquest involved everyone. I distinguish between colonisation and conquest. I do not like to say that Spain conquered. It is no doubt open to discussion, but Spain colonised. If you read the directives issued by Spanish kings of the day on how their representatives were to act, no king from any other country did so much. Spain entered the territory, other imperial nations only settled on the coast. Spain did not pillage as pirates. That should not be forgotten. And there is a mystical element in all this. Spain is still the Motherland, which is something that not many countries can claim.

What can Spain and Latin America do together to prevent populism and polarisation?

We must distinguish «populism» from «popularism.» Populism is when an idea is used to group together the people, systematised under a single idea. That's what Hitler did. Populisms are dictatorial. Fascism and Nazism are populisms that did not end well.

And popularism?

Popularism is the popular government of all. It's when the people express themselves with their best values, with their history and their folklore. It's not a matter of lorry drivers seizing power but of having the people's values present. The best things the people have are their history and their policies. By contrast, populism seizes an idea and regroups the people under that idea... Populism leans towards the ethnic cleansing of some sectors [of the population]. Populism is selective.

Does this mean that popularism is good?

Popularism too can lead to swindlers who take advantage of the occasion and trick the people. There is a book by a writer from the Communist journal La Unità. It bears the title 1933 Syndrome and tells of how, after the fall of the Weimar Republic in 1932, there began a process to seek leaders. And here is when Von Papen introduces a young man, little Adolf, who begins to muster power. And he shows the steps that were taken for him to become consolidated atop that populist idea. This is a warning to present day Europe. «Watch out for this....»