香蕉秀

Event Recap

For the first event of the 2018-2019 academic year, the Boisi Center welcomed Peter Folan, S.J. (Boston College), Mary Ann Hinsdale, IHM (Boston College), and Theresa O鈥橩eefe (Boston College STM) for a screening of聽Pope Francis: A Man of His Word, a 2018 documentary by German filmmaker Wim Wenders. Following the screening, Interim Assistant to the Director Jack Nuelle guided the panelists through a discussion which alternated between reviewing the film and discussing Pope Francis鈥� papacy more broadly. Each panelist gave their initial reactions, with Hinsdale commenting on how Francis seemed to be a Catholic particularly formed by the Second Vatican Council and its messages of love, service, dialogue, and difference. O鈥橩eefe echoed Hinsdale鈥檚 sentiment, remarking on the changing role of the Papacy as it becomes a platform increasingly suited to speak about issues of a global nature. She stressed the courage Francis exhibiOn April 5, E.J. Dionne spoke to an audience of students and professors about political polarization in the United States under the Trump administration. Dionne is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, columnist for the Washington Post, and university professor in the Foundations of Democracy and Culture at Georgetown University. His lecture was both a meditation on what he calls 鈥淭rump鈥檚 attack on the truth,鈥� as well as an exhortation to scholars, media personnel, and citizens about responsible knowledge-sharing in a time of resurgent ethno-nationalism.

Dionne began by examining the strained relationship between Trump as a politician and fact-driven opinion. He cited some examples of Trump鈥檚 intolerance in the early parts of his campaign, especially casting the media as an enemy of the people and Kelly Conway鈥檚 statement about 鈥渁lternative facts.鈥� Such behavior, he contended, necessarily sprouted from developments in American politics since the mid-twentieth century, including shifts in the strategies of the Republican Party and the partisan manipulation of digital technology. The former refers to assaults on the role of accountable media and bipartisan agreement in public governance. The latter entails the burgeoning of right-wing media wings such as Breitbart that subordinate reasoned judgement and sound evidence to unfounded opinion, perception, and emotion.

Dionne then explored the implications of Trumpism for American politics, religion, and journalism. According to Dionne, 脿 la Alexander Hamilton, Trump has chosen not just to 鈥渞ide the storm鈥� of conservatism, but has importantly begun to 鈥渄irect the storm.鈥� Trump has particularly rearticulated one example of what Dionne calls 鈥渆ssentially contested topics,鈥� concepts whose very definitions are constantly challenged: populism. Trumpian populism, Dionne argues, posits an exclusionary form of democracy premised on identity politics, reactionary ideology, and anti-pluralism.

Dionne concluded with some admonitions for upholding truth in this polarized time. Citing Peruvian liberation theologian Gustavo Guti茅rrez, he called upon people of faith to place a renewed emphasis on human dignity and social suffering. Equally significant, he urged journalists to report on the sources of today鈥檚 discontent, or what Jonathan Cobb and Richard Sennett call 鈥渢he hidden injuries of class.鈥�

In closing, Dionne recalled a story from his son, erstwhile canvasser for a political campaign, who once asked an African American constituent, 鈥淎re you going to vote in the upcoming election?鈥� 鈥淚t鈥檚 our job,鈥� he proclaimed, 鈥渂ecause we鈥檙e Americans.鈥漷s by speaking up about issues like poverty and climate change when addressing world leaders with tremendous authority. Folan and Hinsdale both initially commented on the exhaustive nature of the film, in its scope of Francis鈥� activities as well as the length of the film itself.

The discussion moved to the topics Francis addressed and those left unsaid. Panelists noted that not only was this film released before recent allegations against Francis, but also that Francis鈥� interviews were subject to editing and directorial review. With this in mind, all three panelists expressed their satisfaction with the breadth of topics the film portrayed, while questioning the depth and specifics of Francis鈥� answers, particularly regarding the role of women and the problem of clerical abuse. Hinsdale noted that we may be too early to judge if Pope Francis is 鈥淎 Man of His Word,鈥� adding her unease at the manner in which the Pope answered the question of the role of women. O鈥橩eefe agreed, saying it was clear the director chose to focus on other issues as the core of the piece and position the Church in a listening stance, but it left these remaining topics to seem like 鈥渃ameo appearances鈥�. Folan concluded that while he appreciated that they were at least addressed, he disliked the specific phrasing of the Francis鈥� answers on the importance of dialogue and the response to clerical abuse. He characterized Francis鈥� response on this last issue as viewing the problem as episodic, not systemic.

That issue was the topic of the final section of the night, first with the final question asking if the film should be viewed differently now, post-allegations, returning later with audience questions. Folan stressed that Francis showed authentic anger at the problem, but it is difficult to translate that into direct action. Hinsdale agreed, mentioning that the Pope鈥檚 emphasis on discernment leads often to careful but slow action. O鈥橩eefe, responding to these critiques, highlighted that the film focused on showing Francis as human more than as bureaucratic leader. As Hinsdale mentioned, the film was almost hagiographic in its style. The evening concluded with our panelists discussing the roles of subsidiarity and authority in Church accountability and reform, agreeing that we have and want to retain an ordered church, but wondering if that order needs to be quite so hierarchical.