Although in the hours that followed it became clear that the context of the Pope’s statement was broader and deeper, the aftertaste remained.

It is not the first time that the sower’s words did not fall on fertile ground. But not only because of the hardness of the ground but also because of the clumsiness of the announcer himself.

What was heard and when

The Pope talked about Ukraine on February 2, when the staff of the Swiss French-language public broadcaster Radio Télévision Suisse (RTS) visited him in the Vatican to record a television interview with him, which is to be broadcast on March 20 in the Cliché magazine dedicated to culture.

Since the theme of the show is supposed to be white, journalist Lorenzo Buccella’s questions revolved around the different meanings of this color.

As part of the promotion over the weekend, RTS made part of the interview available – of course, the most explosive – to the news agencies ANSA and  Reuters, from which other media subsequently took it.

Both agencies drew attention to the Pope’s words about the white flag in the headline of their reports. Still, in the text itself, they did not avoid the corollary that “negotiation never means capitulation”.On the contrary, the Pope’s words “when you see that you are defeated, that things are not going well, you must have the courage to negotiate”, did not escape TASR.

Since A was heard and B was not heard, the impression was created in the Slovak public space as if František was talking about acknowledging defeat.

More honest readers could put the Pope’s words into context immediately after the publication of the agency’s reports, as the complete transcript of the questions and answers was published by the Vatican news portal Vatican News – first in Italian and later in other languages.  

So what exactly was heard?

There are those in Ukraine who are asking for the courage to surrender, calling for a white flag. But others say it would legitimize the most powerful. What do you think about it?

That’s one interpretation. But I believe that the stronger is the one who sees the situation, who thinks about the people, who dares to show the white flag and negotiate. And today it is possible to negotiate with the help of international powers. The word negotiate is bold. When you see that you are defeated, that things are not going well, you must have the courage to negotiate. You are ashamed, but if you continue, how many more dead will be added? And it will end even worse.

Negotiate in time, and look for a country that will be an intermediary. Today, for example, in the war in Ukraine, many want to be a mediator. For example Turkey… Don’t be shy to negotiate before it gets worse.

Would you also offer to negotiate?

I’m here, period. I sent a letter to the Jews in Israel to think about this situation. Negotiation never means surrender. It is the courage not to lead the country to suicide. Ukrainians with their history, poor people, Ukrainians under Stalin, how much they suffered…

Is white the color of courage?

That’s right, white is the color of courage. But sometimes the anger that leads us to courage is not white…

From the context of the conversation, according to the spokesman of the Holy See, Matteo Bruni, it is clear that the Pope took the image of the white flag from the moderator, while not using it as a symbol of capitulation, but of negotiation. At the same time, he added that the Vatican’s position on this issue remains unchanged for a long time – it is necessary to conclude a truce and look for a diplomatic solution that will guarantee a just and lasting peace.

However, even the well-argued reasoning does not cover the power of the image – especially when the words about the white flag are followed by words about shame and losers, which Francis has never used before. The irritated reaction of Ukrainian representatives, including Archbishop Sviatoslav Ševčuk, is therefore not surprising. Quite simply, Francis looks at many things from too great a (Latin American) distance, and therefore distortedly, to the point of not knowing. Therefore, some of his statements are unfortunate. (In the case of missing senior citizens in Slovak streets, even comical.)       

No, it is not a criticism of his call for an end to the war. His predecessors did it too and it is so right. After all, who else should release the doves of peace, if not the men in white?

Francis looks at many things from too great a (Latin American) distance, and therefore distortedly, to the point of not knowing. And that is why some of his statements are unfortunate.

But the louder Francis’s appeals will sound, the quieter and more intensive papal diplomacy should work. In this, however, the current head of the church differs from, for example, John Paul II, who, in addition to exclaiming “Mai più la guerra!” (Never again war!) avoided commenting on and publicly seeking solutions to the conflicts in Yugoslavia above, Afghanistan, or Iraq. On the other hand, feverish diplomatic activities took place outside the spotlight.

Francis, on the other hand, comments loudly on everything and everywhere. The days when press conferences on board the plane were the highlight of the Pope’s media appearances are, it seems, irretrievably gone. There is an influencer pope who – as Vaticanist Andrea Gagliarducci wrote some time ago – has elevated informality to a system.

Informal is not only his countless conversations but also his manner of expression. However, metaphors, similes, or meaning abbreviations, when, for example, he calls the church a field hospital, are striking and informative in sermons or speeches, but when dealing with demanding theological ( empty hell ) or geopolitical (white flag) topics, they bring more harm than good