Guarini Institute Presents "Pope Francis' Legacy"
On Tuesday, May 27, JCU’s Guarini Institute for Public Affairs hosted the event “Pope Francis’s Legacy,” featuring a panel of journalists and scholars dedicated to exploring the impact of Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who was Pope from 2013 to 2025. The discussion covered key themes of his papacy, including his relationship with his home country of Argentina, his role in global conflicts, his contradictions and his focus on social justice, and his vision for a more inclusive Church.
Professor Federigo Argentieri, Director of the Guarini Institute, opened the floor with a reflection on the recent trajectory of the Catholic Church, noting that Pope Francis was the third consecutive non-Italian pontiff, following John Paul II of Poland and Benedict XVI of Germany. He also outlined the key topics that would be addressed by the panel, including Francis’s decision never to return to Argentina during his papacy, as well as his major accomplishments, particularly the significance of “Laudato Si’,“ the Pope’s landmark 2015 encyclical that places environmental justice at the center of the Church’s moral vision.
Turning to the global conflicts that marked Francis’s time as pope, Argentieri drew a comparison between the war in Ukraine and the ongoing conflict in Gaza. While the Holy Father never explicitly named Russia as the aggressor in more than two years of war, he has clearly identified all actors in the Israel–Palestine conflict. Argentieri questioned why such a distinction has been made, inviting reflection on the political and moral considerations behind these differing approaches.
The first speaker, Professor Sabina Pavone, from the University of Naples L’Orientale, focused her remarks on the Jesuit tradition that shaped Pope Francis’s worldview. She described him as a pope for both believers and secular audiences, committed to social justice, dialogue, and inclusion over exclusion. However, she noted that this inclusive approach also generated tensions with more conservative sectors of the Church. Furthermore, for him peace and dignity were inseparable, and he spoke many times in support of a ceasefire in the various current conflicts. Francis consistently stood with the excluded: migrants, refugees, and women. Though, as Pavone pointed out, his support for women had some limits, particularly due to unresolved issues like abortion and the role of women within Church leadership.
She also mentioned the Synod of Synodality focused on the concept of a “listening Church” and the “Fiducia Supplicans,” a 2023 Dicaster for the Doctrine of the Faith declaration that allows priests to offer non-liturgical blessings to same-sex couples and others in “irregular” unions (an example of Francis’s more pastoral, inclusive focus, though one that has sparked backlash from traditionalist groups) .
Next, it was the turn of Catalina Zaza, an Italo-Argentinian student from the Master’s program in International Affairs at John Cabot University. She shared her perspective on the relationship between Bergoglio and Argentina, both before and after the beginning of his papacy. She posed a central question to the audience: why did Pope Francis never return to Argentina after becoming pope? Despite visiting many other countries in Latin America, why did he never return to his own? Catalina argued that one of the key reasons was political. Francis likely wanted to avoid having his visit co-opted by partisan actors (whether Peronist or anti-Peronist). Another possible reason is that he may have wished to avoid facing renewed accusations of complicity with Argentina’s military dictatorship, a controversy that followed him for many years. Some sectors in Argentinian society have accused him of being involved in the disappearance of two Jesuit priests under his care during the last dictatorship (1976-1982)
At the same time, it is important to recognize that many others in Argentina defended his role during the civic-military dictatorship. They argue that he did everything he could to protect persecuted priests and Christians from the military. One of the most meaningful gestures of his papacy in relation to this period was his 2016 decision to open the Vatican archives, allowing access to documents that could help clarify the role of the Church during that dark chapter of Argentine history.
The discussion continued with Nataliya Kudryk, an Italian journalist of Ukrainian origin, from Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, who addressed Pope Francis’s complex relationship with the war in Ukraine, describing the feeling left in the Ukrainian people as “bittersweet.” She noted that many had hoped the Pope would play a decisive role in ending the invasion and clearly identify the aggressor and the victim. However, Francis never explicitly named Russia as the imperialist invader, a silence that has caused deep disappointment among Ukrainians (especially given that the country is home to a religiously diverse population: over 10% Catholic, almost 60% Orthodox, and the rest belonging to other faiths or not professing a religion).
Kudryk emphasized the profound disillusionment over the fact that the Pope never visited Ukraine, even during the conflict, which could have been a historic gesture. She also introduced the concept of the “just war,” drawn from Catholic tradition, which argues that military action can be morally justified under certain conditions, highlighting the ethical dimension of Ukraine’s self-defense.
Looking ahead, Kudryk expressed hope that the new pope, Leo XIV, might take a strong stance and offer clearer support for Ukraine. She closed with a call for “peace, justice, and truth,” stressing that true peace can only be achieved through justice.
Subsequently, Emilia Zankina, Dean of Temple University Rome, remarked on Pope Francis’s strong commitment to dialogue, listening and negotiation, which was a defining theme of his papacy. However, she also pointed out the Pope’s failure to condemn Russia and President Vladimir Putin for the ongoing war in Ukraine. While Francis repeatedly called for peace and forgiveness, he did not acknowledge Russia’s role as the aggressor in the war.
Zankina emphasized that a peace treaty between Ukraine and Russia will likely only be possible once Russia is significantly weakened (economically, militarily, and in terms of resources). She also offered a historical comparison between Francis and Pope John Paul II, who openly supported the Eastern European resistance to communist regimes and Soviet domination and was openly disliked by Moscow, where he was seen as a tool of Western interests and even called a “Western spy.” By contrast, there are voices in the Vatican who hold a romantic vision of Russia and promote a lenient and consensual relationship – an attitude that is not reciprocated by Moscow. Putin views the Papacy with suspicion, despite the lack of open criticism Francis has made to him. She emphasized the fact that the Pope is ultimately a political figure with the power to exercise influence over geostrategic events.
Saulius Augustinas Kubilius, journalist for Vatican Radio, shared his views on a different perspective from previous speakers, pushing back the idea that Pope Francis was ambiguous regarding Russia’s role in the war in Ukraine. Contrary to the views expressed by Emilia Zankina and Nataliya Kudryk, Kubilius asserted that the Pope publicly identified Russia as the aggressor in the conflict. He cited, for example, Francis’s New Year’s Speech in January 2024, in which the pontiff clearly stated that Russia bore responsibility for the ongoing war.
Kubilius also mentioned the meeting between the Pope and Pastor Denys Kolyada, a young protestant pastor who shared firsthand accounts of the situation in Ukraine. While the Pope may not have been an expert in Eastern European geopolitics, Kubilius emphasized that Francis has always shown a willingness to listen attentively and learn.
He further noted that Pope Francis was a pontiff who initiated many important processes- pastoral, social, and institutional—but was not always able to bring them to completion. He also thinks that the new Pope, Leo XIV, might continue and fulfill those efforts. Kubilius concluded by saying that, despite the challenges, Francis consistently tried to express his vision and values in the best way he could.
Finally, Trisha Thomas, an American journalist with the Associated Press, closed the panel with a reflection on the historical legacy of Pope Francis, describing him as “the people’s Pope.” She emphasized that he will be remembered for his deep connection to everyday people, especially migrants, the LGBTIQ+ community, prisoners, and other marginalized groups. Recounting his many apostolic journeys, Thomas noted that the Pope’s most joyful and authentic moments were often when he was present among local communities, including visiting prison inmates just days before his passing.
Turning to his successor, Pope Leo XIV, Thomas highlighted his unique qualifications: a U.S. and Peruvian citizen, fluent in both English and Spanish, and a member of the Augustinian order. In her view, he is “the right man for the right time” to carry forward Francis’s reform agenda. She pointed out that the choice of the name “Leo” reflects his inspiration from Pope Leo XIII, who authored the foundational social encyclical Rerum Novarum on the rights and dignity of workers. Likewise, Pope Leo appears committed to issues of labor in the digital age and the ethical implications of artificial intelligence.
Addressing the new Pope’s relationship with the American Church and U.S politics, Thomas expressed the view that, unlike Francis, Leo may not take a confrontational stance toward President Trump, nor directly engage in political critique. Instead, she expects his leadership style to be more reserved yet grounded in the continuation of Francis’s social vision.
The panel concluded with a round of questions from the audience on topics such as the possibility and potential impact of an African pope, the significance of Pope Francis’s visit to Cuba in 2015, and how Pope Leo might take a clearer or more assertive position regarding the conflict in Ukraine.
(Catalina Zaza)
