Even though Borghesi singles out certain Italians for discussion, he focuses especially on three American Catholic neoconservatives: (1) Michael Novak (1933-2017); (2) Richard John Neuhaus (1936-2009); and (3) George Weigel (born in 1951). For specific page references to each of them, see Borghesi's "Index" (pages 269, 269, and 271, respectively).
In Borghesi's "Introduction: Beyond the Theological-Political Model: Pope Francis's 'Mobile' Church" (pages 1-35), we find an important "Translator's Note": "American readers should note that the word liberal is used here and frequently throughout this book - and throughout the Western world outside the United States - with a meaning that is rather different than the way it is commonly used in the context of contemporary U.S. politics. Since the root of the word's meaning is freedom (Latin: liber = 'free'), free market capitalism is often referred to as 'liberalism' and its advocates as 'liberals.' Thus the word liberal is not at all, in this context, the opposite of conservative, and a person or idea that would often be called 'conservative' in the United States would in certain ways be considered 'liberal' in Europe. Leftist is the word often used in Europe to describe that Americans often mean when they use liberal" (page 16).
So American neoconservative advocates of free market capitalism are known in Europe as liberals. OK? But Pope Francis is not an advocate of free market capitalism, so he is not favored by American neoconservatives, eh?
In Borghesi's "Introduction," he says, "This book analyzes the Catholic neoconservative movement, beginning with a consideration of the early leaders, Michael Novak first, and then George Weigel and Richard John Neuhaus. Their attempt is 'hijack' the pontificate of [Pope] John Paul II first, and that of [Pope] Benedict XVI later, brought them to the height of American and, at times, global Catholic intelligentsia. Their influence, even in the Italian ecclesial context, has been conspicuous and little investigated. But understanding it goes a long way toward explaining the resistance that has been met by Pope Francis in some segments of the church, especially in the United States. Opposition to [Pope] Francis, to his fundamental documents Evangelii Gaudium [2013], Laudato Si' [2015], and Fratelli Tutti [2020], is based on a vision of the world devised by these Catholic neoconservatives" (pages 33-34).
For further discussion of Pope Francis' 2013 apostolic exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, see my OEN article "Pope Francis' 2013 Apostolic Exhortation Is Coherent - and Beautiful!" (dated September 29, 2019);
For further discussion of Pope Francis' 2020 social encyclical Fratelli Tutti, see my OEN article "Pope Francis' Vision for the World" (dated October 15, 2020):
However, even if we were to allow that the American Catholic neoconservatives attempted to hijack the pontificates of Pope John Paul II and Benedict XVI, we should not disregard the campaigns the two of them waged against post-Vatican II Roman Catholics that they judged to be guilty of yeastiness, as I would put it. See Matthew Fox's 2011 book The Pope's War: Why Ratzinger's Secret Crusade Has Imperiled the Church and How It Can Be Saved (New York: Sterling Ethos).
No doubt there may be more than one reason why the doctrinally conservative Argentine Jesuit Father Jorge Mario Bergoglio escaped from slipping into the kind of yeastiness that those two conservative popes campaigned against so vigorously. But one reason why he managed to avoid that Marxist terminology that Pope john Paul II abhorred is that Father Bergoglio in Argentina was exposed to what Rafael Luciano refers to as the theology of the people in his 2017 book titled Pope Francis and the Theology of the People, translated by Phillip Berryman (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books), a book not mentioned by Borghesi.
No doubt it would be impossible to sort out exactly how Father Bergoglio was influenced by twice making a 30-day retreat, as part of his lengthy Jesuit formation, in silence (except for the daily conferences with the retreat director) following the Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius Loyola (1491-1556), the founder of the Jesuit order (known formally as the Society of Jesus - abbreviated S.J.). Nevertheless, St. Ignatius Loyola was known for his tact. Perhaps Father Bergoglio learned to value tact from his example. Tact could help him embrace an Argentinian form of liberation theology in which the Marxist terminology that Pope John Paul II found so abhorrent was absent.
I know, I know, Pope Francis, speaking extemporaneously (and therefore unofficially), tends to make pointed statements that the news media then report around the world, some of which anger American neoconservatives. But tact does not necessarily preclude making pointed statements, especially when the point is to express a measure of mercy for certain people. Isn't Pope Francis setting a good example for American neoconservatives by expressing a measure of mercy for certain people?
In any event, Borghesi says, "Bergoglio's [and therefore also Pope Francis'] thought is neither irenic nor Manichaean" (page 30). Amen.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
