Papa Francisco: «Sometimes there are immature positions of faith, they cling to what was done before»

That dualism between those who have strayed and those who remain close by could also be divided into those who have progressive views and those who are essentialists. Your pontificate is reaching ten years and one of the criticisms waged against you is that you have highlighted the disadvantaged, so to say, and more traditional sectors feel misunderstood. Are you in any way affected by the fact that certain currents that historically have been in the inner circle of the Church feel that the same degree of attention is not given to doctrinal matters?

The attention remains the same. Sometimes they reflect positions of immature faith, they don't feel secure, and they latch on to something, they grip onto what used to be done. Tradition is not the issue. Tradition is a source of inspiration. Tradition is our roots, those that make you grow, they walk and grow and make you grow vertically. The problem is when you walk backwards.

In what way?

In Italian I would call it «indietrismo»: «No, it's better the way it used to be done,» «it's safer,» «don't take risks.» It's walking backwards. Paraphrasing The Letter to the Hebrews, «We are not people who turn back, we keep going forward.» It's the sin of turning back to play it safe. And I think that is what is going on in the Church.

For fear of the present or the future …

Fear of the future. A musician once said that tradition is a guarantee for the future. And another one said that tradition is the living faith of the dead; and traditionalism is the dead faith of the living. Tradition should thrust you up, it makes you grow.

Ortega y Gasset wrote that he liked the past precisely because it was past, and the issue comes with those who want to turn the past into the present.

The past is an inspiration for the present. What I'm saying is that trying to put everything in a closed container does not work. Faith develops, it grows, and morals grow, but of course not just any way. Vicente de Lerins used to say that that development has to be «ut annis consolidetur, dilatetur tempore, sublimetur aetate». In other words, in such a way that by growing it is consolidated, it spreads over time and becomes refined over the years.

When you were a cardinal you once said: «I try to be faithful to the Church, but I always remain open to dialogue.»

You cannot live without a horizon. You must have a faith that is deeply rooted, but with a horizon to grow. Otherwise, there would be no freedom, there would be no Christian freedom.

February marks the tenth anniversary of the renunciation of Benedict XVI.

I often visit him and come out strengthened by his transparent regard. He leads a life of contemplation... He's in good spirits, he is lucid, well alive, he speaks in a low voice, but goes along with your conversation. I admire his intelligence. One of the greats.

What do you appreciate most in Benedict?

He is a saint. A man of a high spiritual life.

When we see recent pictures of Benedict, at age 95, it is inevitable to reflect that it would have been very difficult for him to govern the Church had he not stepped down.

Could haves and would haves are always tricky, so I avoid going down that road …

Are you going to leave a well-defined status of the Pope Emeritus?

No. I didn't change a thing, I didn't even think about doing it. Perhaps the Holy Spirit has no interest in me worrying about those things.

You have included several women in high positions, but there still isn't one as the head of a dicastery …

That's right. But there will be. I have thought of one for a dicastery where there will be a vacancy in two years. There is nothing to prevent a woman from guiding a dicastery in which a layman can be a prefect.

On what does this depend?

If it is dicastery of a sacramental nature, it has to be presided over by a priest or a bishop. But what is debated is whether authority comes from the mission, as contended by Cardinal Ouellet, or from the sacrament, as contended by Rouco Varela. It's a curious exchange between cardinals, a matter that is still debated by theologians.

Benedict XVI began to meet with victims of abuse and you have continued. I imagine it is the most difficult among your tasks.

It is very, very painful. They are people who were destroyed by someone who was supposed to help them to mature and grow. It is very hard. Even if there were only one case, it is terrifying that the person who is meant to lead you to God should destroy you on the way. This is not something to be negotiated.

The most painful task

«Against the abuses there is no possible negotiation, they are destroyed people»

After one of these meetings, you decided to reopen a case of abuse in Spain, at Gaztelueta school.

The victim told me his story and that he had not received any reply on the trial at the Vatican. I came here and asked that it be examined. There had been a trial but, since there was a civil judgment, they left it at that and took it no further. I don't know what stage it is at, but I do know that it is in good hands. It's not the only case that has been reopened. There is another case involving a Spanish priest. The procedure had begun, but the case file was misplaced. I passed it to the Spanish branch of the Roman Rota. The president of the Rota is taking it forward. We reopened it without qualms.

Do you think society will end up considering that the Church is at last acting decisively to put an end and pursue cases of abuse? Do you think the Church will be «forgiven»?

The fact that we are going along this road is good. But achieving forgiveness or otherwise does not only depend on us. There is one thing I wish to say. Issues must be interpreted according to the hermeneutics of their time. It's what we do with slavery. In those days there was the discussion of whether slaves possessed a soul or were devoid of a soul. It is unfair to judge a situation of the past with the hermeneutical tools of the present. The hermeneutical approach of the past was one of hiding everything under the carpet, which unfortunately is still done in certain sectors of society, such as families and neighbourhoods.

Do you have an explanation for the covering up of times past?

Humanity is progressing and increasingly taking over moral issues that do not have to remain hidden. We must be increasingly aware. That is where Benedict was so bold. According to statistics, between 42% and 46% of abuse episodes take place in the family or the neighbourhood, and they are covered up. We used to do the same until the scandals came out in Boston around 2002. Why? My explanation is this: We lack the strength to tackle this. Now I understand that they do not know how to tackle this, but I do not justify it. First the Church hid those cases, and then it had the grace to broaden its view and to say «No», taking it to the very end.

Is it not frustrating to see how slow the advances are in this battle?

I see that, unfortunately, it is a very big evil, and that «little by little» we are tackling it … We are taking these steps assisted by God. But there is a point in the cases of abuse that remains a mystery to me.

What is it?

Pornographic videos involving minors, which are produced live. Where are they produced? In what country? Nobody knows. Who covers all that up? Here we should call on those in positions of responsibility in society. What cover is still afforded to groups that film child pornography? This is a cry for help.

What would you say to those who mention that their faith is faltering when new cases arise?

It is good that you feel outrage about this. That leads you to act to prevent it, to make your contribution. It doesn't scare me. If their faith is faltering, it's because it is alive. Otherwise, you would feel nothing at all.

I imagine that all kind of matters make their way to the Pope's desk, forcing you to take many different decisions. What tip would you leave for your successors?

I would tell them not to make the same mistakes I made, simply that.

Are there many mistakes?

Oh yes, there are a few.

I am surprised that you have chosen new cardinals from many different backgrounds, who do not know much of each other. Don't you think that will make matters difficult at future conclaves?

Of course. Yes, from a human standpoint. But the one working there is the Holy Spirit. There was someone, I don't remember who it was, who made the proposal that the election of the new Pope should only involve the cardinals who were living in Rome. Is that the universal Church?

Pope Francis, a touchy question. What happens if a pope is suddenly rendered unable due to health issues or an accident? Wouldn't it be best to have a rule in place for such cases?

In practice, there already is a rule. I have already signed my renunciation. The Secretary of State at the time was Tarcisio Bertone. I signed it and said: «If I should become impaired for medical reasons or whatever, here is my renunciation. Here you have it.» I don't know who Cardinal Bertone has given that letter to, but I handed it to him when he was the Secretary of State.

Paul VI also drafted his letter of renunciation in the event of a permanent impairment.

That's right, and I think Pious XII also did the same.

You had never said that.

It's the first time I'm saying it.

You want to know it

This is realy i am telling you. Now someone will run up to Bertone, «Give me that piece of paper!» … (Laughs). I'm sure he gave it to Cardinal Pietro Parolin, the new Secretary of State. I gave it to Bertone because he was the Secretary of State.