The Shepherd Against the Leviathan: Pope Francis, State Power, and Contemporary Narrative Warfare.

1.0 Introduction: The End of an Era, The Defining Question

The death of Pope Francis concludes a pontificate that unfolded against a backdrop far more complex than internal ecclesiastical debates alone; it navigated the turbulent currents of a global landscape reshaped by the fall of the Berlin Wall and the subsequent unravelling of the Soviet empire. This period witnessed not only the reconfiguration of geopolitical power but also the resurgence of potent ethno-nationalist sentiments and the rise of far-right political movements across Europe and the West. It is within this specific historical juncture, marked by anxieties surrounding identity, globalization, and the perceived decline of traditional structures, that the significance of Francis's papacy must be fully appraised. His tenure became an unexpected focal point in a deepening ideological struggle, positioning his message of universalism against powerful exclusionary forces.

A striking, albeit disturbing, feature of this contemporary ideological terrain is the paradoxical admiration expressed by certain white supremacist and neo-fascist groups for Vladimir Putin's Russia, juxtaposed with their often intense animosity towards Pope Francis. Figures associated with the alt-right, such as Richard Spencer, have lauded Russia as perhaps the "sole white power in the world," praising its assertive nationalism and embrace of socially conservative, "traditional values" as a bulwark against perceived Western decadence. This perspective finds resonance in narratives casting Putin as a defender of white, Christian identity, a "shining city on a hill" for those who feel alienated by multiculturalism and liberal social norms. Such admiration is often fueled by Russia's documented cultivation of ties with Western far-right organizations and its promotion of an anti-liberal agenda, which these groups interpret as a validation of their own worldview and a sign of a powerful ally.

Conversely, these same circles frequently direct vitriolic criticism towards Pope Francis, demonizing him as a symbol of the very forces they oppose. His consistent advocacy for migrants and refugees, dramatically initiated by his first papal journey outside Rome not to a centre of power but to the migrant landing point of Lampedusa, is interpreted as a direct assault on national sovereignty and ethno-racial homogeneity. There, his lament for the drowned and his stark condemnation of a "globalization of indifference" (Francis, 2013a) resonated far beyond the immediate tragedy, implicitly challenging the premises of nationalist closure and the dehumanization inherent in anti-immigrant rhetoric. Similarly, his calls for compassion towards LGBTQ+ individuals, his cautious openings towards blessing same-sex couples (Fiducia Supplicans, 2023), and his persistent efforts in interfaith dialogue, notably with Islam (Document on Human Fraternity, 2019), are framed by these extremist groups as betrayals of authentic Christianity and capitulations to a relativistic, multicultural agenda. Francis, with his emphasis on universal fraternity (Fratelli Tutti, 2020) and social justice, becomes an antagonist in their narrative, an obstacle to the realization of their exclusionary vision, precisely because his message transcends the narrow confines of nation, race, and creed.

This external context illuminates the profound implications of Francis's deliberate pastoral and theological choices. His famous query regarding gay priests, "Who am I to judge?" (cited in Osuji, 2017), while primarily impacting internal Church discourse, also signaled a departure from the rigid moral certainty often weaponized by illiberal movements. His critiques of economic systems that "kill" (Evangelii Gaudium, 2013b, para. 53) and foster a "throwaway culture," while sometimes misconstrued, can be understood as targeting the profound social inequalities and existential precariousness that create fertile ground for extremist ideologies, rather than a simplistic rejection of market economies. His plea for environmental responsibility (Laudato Si', 2015b) further underscored a vision of interconnectedness and shared global destiny starkly contrasting with nationalist isolationism. These actions, coupled with efforts towards synodality within the Church, painted a picture of a papacy attempting to offer a different model of engagement with modernity – one grounded in dialogue, mercy, and an unwavering focus on the dignity of the marginalized.

Naturally, this project provoked significant internal resistance from traditionalist factions within Catholicism, concerned about doctrinal continuity, liturgical tradition, and institutional stability – fault lines that will be explored later. Yet, to understand the full measure of Francis's pontificate requires recognizing that these internal debates were inseparable from the larger ideological confrontation unfolding externally. His consistent focus on the peripheries functioned not merely as a pastoral strategy but as a profound political and ethical statement in an era grappling with the resurgence of the centre's nationalist claims.

Therefore, this analysis contends that Pope Francis's legacy is forged in this complex interplay between internal Church dynamics and the external pressures of a world witnessing the revival of potent nationalist and authoritarian currents, many drawing sustenance from the unresolved legacies of 20th-century totalitarianism. By examining his key interventions, situating them within the long historical dialogue between spiritual authority and temporal power, and critically juxtaposing his universalist vision with the state-aligned, ethno-nationalist models exemplified by the contemporary Russian Orthodox Church and the ideology of figures like Alexander Dugin, this paper seeks to illuminate the stakes. It explores how Francis's pontificate, often targeted by the very forces promoting exclusionary identities, functioned as an essential, albeit contested, assertion of universal humanism, posing the critical question: How effectively did his persistent call to encounter the 'other' serve as a necessary counter-current to the powerful tide of ideologies seeking refuge in the perceived certainties of blood and soil?

2.0 Historical Precedents: The Enduring Tension Between Universal Church and State Power

Christian history is marked by an enduring, often volatile, negotiation between claims of universal spiritual significance and the particularist demands of temporal power. This dynamic rarely settled into stable equilibrium, instead tracing complex paths shaped by theological conviction, institutional ambition, and political expediency. Understanding the contrasting trajectories that emerged, particularly the distinctive evolution towards concepts of institutional autonomy in the Latin West versus models favouring state integration or outright dominance, provides crucial context for navigating the ideological landscape Pope Francis inherited – a landscape profoundly scarred by the 20th century's experiments in radical state supremacy.

The Western European experience, while fraught with conflict, witnessed the gradual articulation and defense of a distinct sphere for spiritual authority. Early formulations, like Pope Gelasius I's fifth-century 'Two Swords' doctrine distinguishing priestly and royal powers (Ullmann, 1970), laid theoretical groundwork. More consequentially, the eleventh-century Gregorian Reform movement represented a concerted effort to liberate the Church from lay control, particularly over ecclesiastical appointments during the Investiture Controversy (Tellenbach, 1993). The assertion of papal authority capable of holding even emperors accountable, symbolized by events like Canossa (Robinson, 2004), embedded within the Western tradition a potent, if contested, principle: the existence of a moral and spiritual authority conceptually distinct from, and not merely subservient to, political rule. While consolidating monarchies (e.g., Philip IV of France) persistently challenged papal claims and sought to subordinate the Church to national agendas (Wood, 1967; Martimort, 1953), the underlying ideal of the Church's inherent autonomy and universal mission, transcending political boundaries, remained a powerful counter-current, arguably contributing to the later development of Western concepts of limited government and spheres of protected conscience.

This trajectory contrasts significantly with patterns observed elsewhere, notably the Caesaropapism often characterizing the Byzantine East. There, the close alignment between imperial authority and the Church frequently led to emperors intervening significantly in doctrinal and ecclesiastical matters, viewing religious uniformity primarily as an instrument reinforcing imperial stability and cohesion (Hussey, 1986; Dagron, 2003). This established a powerful historical archetype of Church-state symbiosis where the capacity for independent prophetic witness could be compromised by the perceived necessities of political order, a model whose echoes reverberate in contemporary contexts where religious institutions appear closely aligned with state interests.

The complexities intensified with the Protestant Reformation. While fracturing the religious unity of the West, it also, paradoxically, fueled divergent paths. On one hand, it provided theological justification for rulers seeking control over religion within their territories, culminating in the principle cuius regio, eius religio ('whose realm, his religion') formalized at Augsburg (Scribner & Dixon, 2003). This principle enshrined the subordination of religious affiliation to territorial sovereignty, fostering state churches susceptible to nationalist capture. On the other hand, the Reformation's emphasis on individual conscience, coupled with later Enlightenment ideals championing reason and individual rights (Israel, 2010), contributed to the eventual emergence in parts of the West of frameworks advocating religious freedom and the separation of Church and State – principles allowing religious bodies to operate as autonomous actors within civil society. It was within this evolving context that modern Catholic Social Teaching developed, beginning with Leo XIII's Rerum Novarum (Schuck, 1991), demonstrating the Church's capacity to engage critically yet constructively with modern social and political orders from a position of established autonomy, applying its ethical framework to contemporary challenges.

The 20th century, however, unleashed totalitarian ideologies that represented a radical departure from all prior models, including traditional autocracy. Fascism in Italy, National Socialism in Germany, and Soviet Communism in Russia, despite their distinct philosophical origins and proclaimed enemies, exhibited a chilling convergence in their fundamental methodology of power. Central to each was the hypertrophic inflation of the state or ruling party, which claimed absolute authority over every facet of human existence, obliterating distinctions between public and private life. This required the systematic dismantling of independent civil society – political parties, free trade unions, autonomous cultural organizations, and critically, independent religious institutions. These regimes demanded total ideological conformity, enforced through pervasive propaganda, secret police, and the suppression of any dissenting voice. Individual conscience and liberty were rendered meaningless before the absolute claims of the collective, defined along national, racial, or class lines.

Critically, these totalitarian systems shared a profound hostility towards any source of moral authority or transnational loyalty that could challenge the state's absolute sovereignty. The Catholic Church, with its universal claims, hierarchical independence, and distinct moral framework, was inevitably perceived as an obstacle (Conway, 1968; Kertzer, 2014; Luxmoore & Babiuch, 1992). While Soviet Communism’s official atheism led to particularly brutal religious persecution aimed at eradication, the underlying statist impulse – the drive to control or eliminate any autonomous social or moral force – was a structural feature shared with its Fascist and Nazi counterparts. The goal was the creation of a 'total state' leaving no space for independent thought or allegiance.

The catastrophic experiences under these regimes indelibly demonstrated the lethal consequences of unchecked state power and the critical necessity of autonomous institutions – including religious ones – capable of defending human dignity against ideologies that deify the state, race, or party. This hard-won historical lesson profoundly shaped post-war political thought and found expression in the Catholic Church's landmark declarations at the Second Vatican Council, particularly Dignitatis Humanae (affirming religious freedom grounded in human dignity) and Gaudium et Spes (committing the Church to dialogue with and service to the modern world) (O'Malley, 2008; Alberigo & Komonchak, eds., 2005). These documents represent the Church's definitive modern reaffirmation of its commitment to institutional autonomy and universal human rights, principles forged in the crucible of history and standing in stark opposition to the legacy of totalitarian statism. It is this specific post-Vatican II, post-totalitarian understanding of the Church's role – critically engaged yet resolutely autonomous – that Pope Francis inherited and sought to implement, positioning him directly against contemporary forces exhibiting echoes of that same 20th-century drive towards state supremacy and the subordination of faith to political agendas.

3.0 Contextualising the Tension: The Pre-Francis Landscape

The election of Jorge Mario Bergoglio in 2013 occurred at a moment when the initial euphoria following the collapse of Soviet Communism had long since given way to complex and often unsettling global realignments. While the pontificates of John Paul II and Benedict XVI spanned this era of transition, providing doctrinal clarity and emphasizing continuity for many within the Church, the broader world stage was increasingly characterized by fragmentation, ideological uncertainty, and the unsettling resurgence of forces seemingly relegated to the past. Understanding the specific contours of this external landscape – the rise of potent nationalist movements, the exploitation of societal anxieties, and the emergence of alternative, illiberal civilizational models – is essential to grasp the context into which Francis stepped and the challenges his papacy would inevitably confront.

The decades following the fall of the Berlin Wall witnessed profound transformations across Europe. The eastward expansion of the European Union and NATO reshaped political alliances, while globalization accelerated economic integration, bringing prosperity to some but dislocation and anxiety to others. Within this fluid environment, particularly across a continent grappling with questions of identity in an increasingly interconnected world, fertile ground emerged for populist and nationalist political forces. Capitalizing on legitimate concerns about economic inequality, immigration, cultural change, and perceived overreach by supranational institutions, far-right parties gained unprecedented traction in numerous European nations. Their rhetoric frequently centred on restoring national sovereignty, protecting ostensibly threatened traditional identities, and implementing restrictive immigration policies, often casting liberal democracy and multiculturalism as detrimental forces.

Simultaneously, the Russian Federation, navigating its own post-Soviet transition, began to project itself with increasing confidence as a distinct civilizational pole, offering an explicit ideological alternative to Western liberalism. This project involved the active promotion of "traditional values" – often defined in opposition to perceived Western moral laxity regarding gender, sexuality, and family structures – closely intertwined with a narrative of strong state power and national resurgence. The Russian Orthodox Church, consolidating its influence after decades of suppression, became increasingly aligned with these state objectives, lending spiritual legitimacy to a political agenda emphasizing national distinctiveness and resistance to external liberal norms. Crucially, this state-sponsored ideology, amplified through sophisticated information channels, began to find sympathetic ears among various anti-establishment, conservative, and nationalist groups within Europe itself, who saw in Moscow a potential ally against shared perceived adversaries like secularism, EU integration, or American influence.

While the Catholic Church itself was navigating internal complexities inherited from the post-Vatican II era – including ongoing debates about liturgical practice, the application of doctrine in diverse global contexts, and pockets of organized traditionalist discontent (Dinges & Hitchcock, eds., 2018) – these internal matters unfolded against this much larger backdrop of rising external ideological pressure. Indeed, some of the anxieties expressed within traditionalist circles regarding perceived erosions of identity or moral clarity arguably mirrored, albeit within a different framework, the broader societal anxieties being exploited by political actors. Furthermore, the Church's moral authority and institutional capacity were significantly hampered by the escalating clergy sexual abuse crisis. The revelations of widespread abuse and, critically, institutional cover-up (John Jay College, 2004; Ryan Report, 2009) generated profound public distrust and an internal crisis of credibility (Coppa, 2013; Keenan, 2011), severely weakening its ability to offer compelling moral leadership precisely when the public square was becoming increasingly contested by illiberal voices.

Thus, the landscape immediately preceding Francis's election was one marked by a palpable sense of drift and a growing ideological vacuum in many parts of the West. Resurgent nationalism offered simplistic answers to complex problems, illiberal state actors actively promoted alternative models challenging democratic norms, and the established moral authority of institutions like the Catholic Church faced significant internal and external challenges. There existed a pressing need for a clear, globally resonant voice capable of articulating a compelling vision of universal human dignity, solidarity, and dialogue as a counter-force to the siren calls of exclusion, division, and authoritarianism. It was into this specific, challenging conjuncture – a world grappling with the ghosts of its totalitarian past and the uncertainties of its globalized future – that Pope Francis arrived, bringing a perspective shaped significantly by the peripheries rather than the traditional centers of Western power.

4.0 The Shepherd Seeks the Lost Sheep: or a Jesuit is taking the Fight

Pope Francis's pontificate unfolded as a deliberate reorientation, seeking to address the anxieties and fractures of the contemporary world not from the traditional centers of ecclesiastical or geopolitical power, but from the perspective of the peripheries. His Argentinian origins and pastoral experience outside Europe undoubtedly shaped a sensibility attuned to the human consequences of global economic disparities and political instability – realities often exploited by the resurgent nationalist and populist movements identified in the preceding context. His papacy can thus be analyzed as a sustained effort to construct and enact a counter-narrative grounded in universal human dignity, challenging the exclusionary logic gaining traction across the globe.

The pontificate's trajectory was arguably prefigured in the deliberate choice of the papal name "Francis." Evoking the figure of Francis of Assisi inherently signaled a fundamental anthropological orientation: one prioritizing the concrete, often vulnerable, human individual over abstract systems, collective identities, or the impersonal mechanisms of power. This choice implicitly positioned his papacy in tension with ideologies – whether rooted in radical statism or certain forms of economic determinism – that diminish the intrinsic worth of the individual in favour of the collective, the nation, the party, or market forces. The consistent papal focus on the poor and the marginalized thus becomes less a matter of mere charity and more the practical outworking of this foundational commitment to individual dignity. It represented an insistence on the visibility and value of those whom dominant structures – political and economic – often render invisible or treat as collateral damage. This ethical recentering, articulated forcefully in critiques of economic exclusion and the "idolatry of money" within Evangelii Gaudium (Francis, 2013b, paras. 53-60), directly confronted the social atomization and sense of grievance readily exploited by nationalist demagogues. Furthermore, this emphasis on the particular individual extended to a conception of leadership itself. The well-documented rejection of papal opulence (residing in Casa Santa Marta, simpler transport) functioned as more than a critique of clericalism; it embodied the principle that significant social and ethical meaning resides in individual action and witness. It presented a model of authority grounded in personal responsibility and service to the individual, implicitly challenging both the hierarchical pomp associated with authoritarian power and deterministic philosophies that minimize the capacity of individual ethical choices to shape social reality (Ivereigh, 2015).

Francis often employed pastoral actions as performative challenges to exclusionary norms. His annual Maundy Thursday foot-washing ritual, by consistently including prisoners, refugees, women, and non-Christians, dramatically enacted a message of radical inclusion and service that transcended traditional liturgical boundaries (Mickens, 2018). These gestures served as living rebukes to ideologies seeking to build walls and categorize humanity into insiders and outsiders, affirming a common vulnerability and dignity.

Nowhere was this confrontation with exclusionary ideologies more direct or sustained than in his unwavering advocacy for migrants and refugees. Beginning with his landmark visit to Lampedusa, where he mourned the drowned and condemned the "globalization of indifference" (Francis, 2013a; O'Brien & Gonzalez, 2018), Francis relentlessly framed the welcoming of migrants not merely as a policy option but as a fundamental ethical imperative rooted in shared humanity (Fratelli Tutti, 2020). His call to "welcome, protect, promote and integrate" (Francis, 2017) stood in stark, persistent opposition to the increasingly restrictive immigration policies and hostile anti-migrant rhetoric central to the platforms of numerous European far-right and nationalist parties, including Germany's AfD, Italy's Lega, France's Rassemblement National, and Hungary's Fidesz (Mudde, 2019; Wodak, 2015). This stance, perhaps more than any other, positioned him as a primary antagonist for ethno-nationalist and white supremacist groups who viewed migration as a threat to cultural and racial purity, and who targeted him for challenging their vision of fortified, homogenous nation-states. His advocacy implicitly countered narratives, sometimes linked to external disinformation campaigns, portraying migration as solely a source of instability rather than a complex human reality demanding a humane response (Giles, 2019; Polyakova & Boyer, 2018).

The principle of mercy extended beyond geopolitical borders to embrace those marginalized within society and even the Church. The overarching theme of the Jubilee Year of Mercy (Francis, 2015a) and concrete initiatives like providing services for the homeless near the Vatican emphasized forgiveness and reintegration over condemnation, embodying his vision of the Church as a 'field hospital' tending to the wounded (Francis, 2013c). This radical emphasis on mercy directly challenged the often punitive logic of exclusionary ideologies. His approach towards LGBTQ+ individuals exemplified this distinct pastoral methodology. The famous "Who am I to judge?" remark (Osuji, 2017), while not altering doctrine, signaled a profound shift in tone, prioritizing encounter and dignity over abstract condemnation. Later cautious openings towards blessing same-sex couples (Fiducia Supplicans, 2023) further underscored a commitment to accompanying individuals in their specific circumstances. This pastoral orientation offered a significant counterpoint to the legal prohibitions and state-sponsored hostility faced by LGBTQ+ individuals in regimes like Russia, where leaders weaponize "traditional values" rhetoric for social control and to contrast themselves with perceived Western liberalism (Wilkinson, 2014; Agadjanian & Rousselet, 2019) – a rhetoric often echoed by European far-right parties seeking to mobilize similar sentiments (Makarychev & Medvedev, 2020).

Even internal Church controversies under Francis often reflected this larger tension. The debate surrounding Amoris Laetitia (Francis, 2016), particularly its suggestion of pastoral discernment for divorced and remarried Catholics, became a flashpoint precisely because it prioritized individual conscience and complex realities over the universal application of rigid rules (Burke et al., 2016; Granados, Kampowski & Pérez-Soba, eds., 2017). While framed internally as a doctrinal dispute, Francis's consistent elevation of mercy (Misericordiae Vultus, 2015a) and emphasis on discernment represented an approach more aligned with traditions valuing individual moral reasoning than with authoritarian systems demanding absolute, unquestioning conformity to imposed norms.

His critique of contemporary economic systems, drawing on Catholic Social Teaching (Massaro, 2015), consistently targeted the human consequences of unchecked financial power and structural inequality – the "economy that kills," the "throwaway culture" (Francis, 2013b). This ethical critique focused on the erosion of human dignity and social cohesion, conditions fostering the resentment exploited by political extremists. It offered an implicit contrast not only to perceived neoliberal indifference but also to the corruption and inefficiency often characterizing state-controlled or oligarchic systems, such as Russia's crony capitalism (Åslund, 2019), where the common good is frequently sacrificed for elite gain or state power. Similarly, the encyclical Laudato Si' (Francis, 2015b) framed environmental degradation and climate change as inseparable from social injustice – the "cry of the earth" linked to the "cry of the poor." By calling for an "integral ecology" based on global cooperation and universal responsibility (Kim & Riedy, 2017), it directly challenged nationalist approaches prioritizing short-term economic advantage or resource exploitation over planetary health and solidarity, a tension particularly visible in resource-dependent states prioritizing extraction (Henry & Douhovnikoff, 2018).

Finally, consistent with Vatican II's universalist thrust (Nostra Aetate, in Flannery, ed., 1992), Francis actively pursued interfaith and ecumenical dialogue. His historic meeting with Grand Imam Ahmed Al-Tayeb (Francis & Al-Tayeb, 2019) exemplified a commitment to building bridges and promoting peace across religious divides. This stood in stark contrast to the instrumentalization of religion witnessed in the promotion of Orthodox Christianity as a pillar of national identity and geopolitical influence (e.g., the 'Russian World' concept) (Laruelle, 2016; Agadjanian, 2018), and challenged the exclusionary Christian identity politics employed by European far-right movements (Brubaker, 2017).

Taken together, these diverse actions and teachings constitute a remarkably coherent papal program. Francis’s consistent focus on the marginalized (poor, migrants, LGBTQ+), his ethical critique of exclusionary economic and political structures, his methodology prioritizing mercy and dialogue over judgment and rigid legality, and his assertion of universal responsibility and fraternity collectively positioned his pontificate as a direct, multi-front challenge. It confronted not only internal resistances but, more significantly, the converging contemporary threats of ethno-nationalism, tribalism, and the weaponization of tradition – forces gaining momentum across Europe and often finding ideological sustenance or political encouragement from authoritarian states promoting an anti-liberal agenda. His papacy, therefore, was necessarily engaged in the ideological battlefield of its time, consistently articulating a humanist alternative grounded in encounter and universal dignity.

5.0 The Internal Fracture: Analyzing Traditionalist Opposition to the Franciscan Vision

Pope Francis ascended to the papacy on March 13, 2013, stepping onto a world stage increasingly defined by the potent resurgence of traditionalist ideologies fused with ethno-nationalist politics. This was not merely a continuation of historical conservatism; it was a distinct phenomenon reacting aggressively against globalization, multiculturalism, and liberal democratic norms. As you noted, Vladimir Putin’s Russia strategically positioned itself at the epicentre of this movement, leveraging the influence of the Russian Orthodox Church to promote narratives – including notions of Pan-Slavism – that cast Russia as the principal global defender of "traditional values," Christian civilization, and even, for some adherents, the "white race." This projection, amplified by ideologues like Aleksandr Dugin advocating for a global anti-liberal alliance, found a receptive audience among burgeoning far-right movements and certain traditionalist circles across Europe and North America, who admired Moscow's perceived resistance to Western progressive trends (Shekhovtsov, 2017; Laruelle, 2016). It is impossible to analyze the internal opposition Pope Francis faced without situating it firmly within this charged external context, where "tradition" itself was being actively weaponized for specific geopolitical and ideological ends.

Francis's pontificate, as articulated in the previous section, immediately presented a profound counterpoint to this specific form of globally ascendant, politically instrumentalized traditionalism. His relentless emphasis on universal human dignity irrespective of origin or identity, his compassion for the marginalized – particularly migrants and refugees – his calls for dialogue across religious and cultural divides, and his critique of nationalist closure positioned him in direct opposition to the exclusivist tenets driving the far-right and its perceived Russian patrons. While operating from a foundation of Catholic teaching, his approach embodied a form of "conservative liberalism" – upholding ethical principles and the importance of faith while championing universal solidarity, individual conscience, and engagement with contemporary challenges over retreat into fortified identities. Consequently, when internal Catholic critics accused Francis of being "anti-traditionalist" or undermining Church tradition, the crucial analytical question becomes: which "tradition" did they perceive him to be opposing? Was it solely about internal matters of doctrine and liturgy, or was their conception of "tradition" becoming increasingly entangled with, or at least unresponsive to, the external, politicized traditionalism that Francis actively countered?

Examining the specific points of internal friction through this lens reveals complex dynamics. The doctrinal anxieties surrounding Amoris Laetitia, for instance, while presented as concerns over objective moral truth (Burke et al., 2016; Müller, 2017), also manifested as resistance to a pastoral methodology prioritizing individual conscience and situational complexity. This approach contrasted sharply with the demand for rigid, top-down moral certainty characteristic of the authoritarian traditionalist models gaining external traction. Francis’s trust in discernment appeared, to some critics, as a dangerous concession to the perceived chaos of modern individualism, making them resistant to the very flexibility needed to pastorally engage the complex human realities Francis sought to address. Their emphasis on immutable law, in this context, could functionally align with a broader societal turn towards authoritarian order as an antidote to liberal freedom.

Similarly, the intense conflicts surrounding liturgy, particularly the defense of the pre-Vatican II Mass following Traditionis Custodes (Francis, 2021), cannot be divorced from this larger backdrop. While motivated by genuine piety for many, for some within these communities, the older liturgy became a potent symbol of resistance not only to post-conciliar reforms but also to the perceived broader drift of society away from a preferred historical Christian identity (Kwasniewski, 2016). This inward focus on preserving a specific form, however valuable internally, risked appearing detached from – or even implicitly resistant to – Francis’s urgent outward focus on global crises like migration, poverty, and inter-religious conflict, issues central to his confrontation with ethno-nationalist ideologies. The prioritization of internal liturgical identity could, in effect, create a space where the challenging universalism of Francis's message was less acutely felt.

Institutional resistance to initiatives like synodality (Faggioli, 2021) likewise takes on further meaning. Beyond internal power dynamics, the suspicion towards more decentralized, participatory models of Church governance contrasted with the hierarchical, top-down authority structures implicitly or explicitly admired within the external traditionalist and authoritarian spheres. Francis’s push for a less monarchical, more consultative Church directly challenged a model of power that resonated with anti-liberal political sensibilities.

The most explicit overlap, however, occurred where internal Catholic traditionalism intersected with conservative political alignments, especially in the US (Campbell, Putnam & Lazzaro, 2017). The strong focus on specific "culture war" issues often led to a direct clash with Francis's broader social agenda. Critiques of his stance on immigration, environmentalism, economic inequality, and his critique of nationalism often placed these internal critics in direct rhetorical alignment with secular far-right political actors (Gibson, 2017; Rozell & Whitney, eds., 2021). The language used – attacking Francis as a "globalist," questioning his patriotism, or decrying his dialogue with Islam – frequently mirrored verbatim the talking points of nationalist movements who viewed Putin's Russia sympathetically and Francis with hostility. This convergence raises critical questions about the ability of some internal critics to distinguish between defending specific theological positions and becoming entangled in a political ecosystem fundamentally opposed to the universalist core of Francis’s message. The failure, in these circles, to robustly support Francis's clear opposition to xenophobia and nationalist exclusion, while focusing criticism on his perceived deviations from internal norms, represented a significant disconnect from the primary ideological battleground.

Therefore, a crucial dimension of the internal opposition to Pope Francis appears rooted in a fundamental misreading, or perhaps a deliberate rejection, of his primary antagonists and the nature of the contemporary ideological struggle. By prioritizing internal concerns – specific doctrinal interpretations, liturgical forms, established power structures – or aligning with political forces deeply enmeshed in the anti-liberal, nationalist reaction, these critics often failed to recognize or support Francis’s role as a crucial counter-voice against the rising global tide of politicized, authoritarian traditionalism. His perceived "anti-traditionalism," in this light, was less an attack on authentic Catholic heritage and more a necessary opposition to the instrumentalization and perversion of tradition for exclusionary, nationalist, and often inhumane political ends. The internal fracture within the Church was thus profoundly shaped, and arguably exacerbated, by these powerful external ideological currents and the divergent ways Catholics interpreted and responded to them.

6.0 Contrasting Visions: Pope Francis and the Russian Orthodox Model

A profound paradox haunts religion's encounter with the modern nation-state: possessing the inherent capacity to articulate universal human values that transcend borders, faith simultaneously proves readily susceptible to capture by particularist political projects, its symbols and authority wielded to sanctify national identity or geopolitical ambition. Nowhere is this contemporary divergence more starkly illuminated than in the contrasting trajectories embodied by the papacy of Pope Francis and the prevailing posture of the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) under the leadership of Patriarch Kirill, particularly concerning its relationship with the Russian state. Examining this juxtaposition moves beyond simple comparison; it reveals a fundamental struggle over the very soul of religious witness in an age grappling with resurgent nationalism and the enduring allure of state power. Does faith ultimately serve the inherent dignity of the person, wherever found, or does it become an instrument reinforcing the ramparts of the nation?

History offers ample evidence that the boundary between spiritual authority and temporal power is perpetually contested terrain, rarely marked by lasting settlement. Within this long drama, however, distinct operational logics emerge. One conceives of the religious institution as necessarily possessing a critical autonomy, a sphere of independent moral reasoning and universal mission that allows it, indeed requires it, to engage the world with a voice distinct from that of the state – a position deeply embedded in the post-Vatican II framework informing Francis's papacy (Faggioli, 2012; Murray, 1960). The alternative logic, often finding expression in models like the historical archetype of Caesaropapism or the contemporary invocation of 'Symphonia' between the ROC and the Kremlin, envisions a closer integration, a symbiotic relationship where spiritual and political power ideally work in concert. Yet, as critical observers contend, this pursuit of harmony in practice frequently risks functional subservience, blurring crucial distinctions and potentially muting the Church's capacity for prophetic critique when state actions conflict with ethical imperatives (Papkova, 2016; Knox, 2017; Stoeckl, 2018).

Concrete manifestations of this latter dynamic within the contemporary Russian context are revealing. High-profile endorsements of state foreign policy objectives and military campaigns by the ROC hierarchy provide potent examples of religious authority lending moral weight to political agendas (Elsner, 2022; Public Orthodoxy contributors, 2023). Legal frameworks perceived as granting preferential status to the ROC over other religious groups further underscore the institutional entanglement (US Department of State reports; Forum 18 reports). Perhaps most pervasively, the routine deployment of Orthodox symbols and narratives by political figures serves to sacralize state power and cultivate a specific, often exclusionary, national identity (Burgess, 2008). Such practices, viewed analytically, demonstrate a concerning continuity with the methodologies of instrumentalization employed during the Soviet period, where cultural and ideological institutions were routinely co-opted to serve state purposes. This pattern represents a significant regression from principles of institutional autonomy, echoing the structural logic of state supremacy characteristic of 20th-century totalitarianisms, where independent sources of moral authority were systematically brought under control.

These divergent postures towards state power inevitably fuel starkly contrasting ideological projects on the global stage. Pope Francis, particularly in encyclicals like Fratelli Tutti (2020), consistently champions an outward-looking vision grounded in universal human fraternity, urging dialogue across divides and prioritizing the encounter with the marginalized other – the migrant, the religious minority, the socially excluded. His is fundamentally a project of bridge-building based on shared humanity. Conversely, the influential 'Russian World' (Russkiy Mir) concept, actively promoted with ROC backing, functions as a powerful ethno-religious nationalist ideology (Laruelle, 2016; Curanović, 2022). It constructs a distinct civilizational identity explicitly positioned against a perceived morally compromised West, frequently utilizing a discourse of "traditional values" not merely as cultural descriptors but as political ordnance. This strategically deployed traditionalism serves to enforce social conformity domestically (evidenced in anti-LGBTQ+ legislation – Wilkinson, 2014) while operating internationally as an ideological tool to undermine liberal democratic norms and consolidate alliances with anti-Western political forces, including elements of the European far-right (Darczewska, 2019; Shekhovtsov, 2017). Francis’s persistent emphasis on mercy, complexity, and dialogue presents a direct philosophical challenge to this rigid, often antagonistic, form of weaponized identity politics.

What, then, is the ultimate valuation of the human person within these competing frameworks? Francis’s papacy consistently returned to the concrete, often suffering, individual – his 'field hospital' metaphor prioritizing the wounded person over abstract rules, his defense of conscience in Amoris Laetitia, his critique of economic systems that 'discard' individuals (Pallotti, 2021). It is an anthropology that starts from the periphery, from the one who might be overlooked by the powerful. The alternative model, embedded within the state-centric nationalism championed by Moscow and its ecclesiastical allies, appears structurally inclined to prioritize the collective – the nation, the state, the Orthodox civilization – as the primary vessel of historical meaning and value. As numerous critics of collectivist ideologies have argued across different contexts (e.g., Berdyaev, 1949), such an emphasis carries the inherent risk of diminishing the intrinsic dignity and autonomy of the individual person, subordinating rights and conscience to the perceived imperatives of the larger entity. This logic finds disturbing resonance with the anti-individualist ethos underpinning the totalitarian projects of the last century.

Ultimately, therefore, the contrasting visions embodied by Pope Francis and the contemporary ROC model represent more than differing ecclesiastical styles or political alignments. They signify a fundamental bifurcation in the understanding of religion's purpose in the 21st century. One path insists on the Church's critical autonomy as the guarantor of its ability to serve universal human dignity, foster dialogue, and speak prophetically, even against the state. The other path showcases religion deeply interwoven with national identity and state power, lending spiritual legitimacy to a particularist political project and exhibiting troubling continuities with historical patterns of instrumentalization and state supremacy. Francis’s unwavering commitment to the former path positions his papacy as a crucial contemporary counter-narrative, defending the space for universal conscience against the powerful resurgence of ideologies seeking refuge in the perceived certainties of the national altar – ideologies finding potent philosophical articulation in thinkers like Alexander Dugin.

7.0 Conclusion: Two Poles of Modernity – The Pope of the Peripheries vs. The Philosopher of Empire

Moments of profound geopolitical flux often act as clarifying agents, forcing latent ideological conflicts onto the open stage and compelling a confrontation with fundamental questions about human society's direction. The era spanned by Pope Francis’s pontificate represents precisely such a juncture. His leadership unfolded not merely within the confines of internal Church matters, but against the dramatic backdrop of resurgent ethno-nationalisms, the consolidation of neo-authoritarian states leveraging religious identity, and the pervasive anxieties of a globalized world seeking stable anchors. To assess his legacy requires engaging with this wider context, recognizing his papacy as a significant intervention within a deepening global contest of ideas. Ultimately, the complex tapestry of challenges and responses analyzed throughout this paper arguably crystallizes into a stark polarity, vividly personified in the contrasting worldviews of Pope Francis, the pope of the peripheries, and Alexander Dugin, the influential philosopher of anti-liberal empire.

Alexander Dugin's prolific work offers perhaps the most intellectually coherent, albeit deeply controversial, articulation of the ideology standing in direct opposition to the universalist humanism Francis championed (Laruelle, 2015; Clover, 2016). His "Fourth Political Theory" constitutes an explicit and wholesale rejection of the legacy of Western liberalism – repudiating its emphasis on individual rights, democratic procedures, and universal norms as corrosive and decadent forces (Dugin, 2012). In its place, Dugin advocates for a multipolar world order composed of distinct, hierarchically organized civilizational blocs, with a revitalized Russia/Eurasia positioned as the vanguard defending "Tradition" against the perceived homogenizing onslaught of the liberal West. This vision necessitates the subordination of the individual to the collective – the ethnos, the civilization, the state – and embraces conflict not as a lamentable failure of diplomacy but as a potentially generative, even necessary, force in historical development. Critically, Dugin's thought exhibits significant thematic resonance with the methodologies and anti-individualist impulses characteristic of 20th-century totalitarianisms (Fascism, Nazism, Sovietism), albeit repackaged in geopolitical and esoteric terms. His work provides a sophisticated philosophical rationale for authoritarian state power, the sacralization of political struggle, and the rejection of a common humanity bound by universal ethics, thereby intellectualizing the very forces Francis confronted.

Against this stands the consistent witness of Pope Francis's pontificate, a sustained affirmation of radically different premises. As explored previously, his papacy’s compass consistently pointed towards the concrete individual, particularly the one situated on the margins – the migrant risking perilous journeys, the poor excluded by indifferent economic systems, the person grappling with conscience in complex life situations (Fratelli Tutti, Evangelii Gaudium). This grounding in lived human experience translated into a political ethic prioritizing encounter, dialogue, and mercy over exclusion and condemnation. His insistence on the Church's critical autonomy from state power served not as a retreat from the world, but as the necessary condition for advocating credibly on behalf of universal human dignity and the common good, transcending narrow national interests. Furthermore, his vision of "integral ecology" (Laudato Si') and his tireless pursuit of interfaith understanding (Document on Human Fraternity) proposed a model of global interconnectedness and shared responsibility fundamentally at odds with Dugin's paradigm of civilizational antagonism and geopolitical zero-sum games. Francis's project was intrinsically one of building bridges, rooted in the conviction of a shared humanity.

The juxtaposition, therefore, illuminates more than just contrasting personalities or policies; it reveals two fundamentally divergent paths emerging from the crucible of contemporary anxieties. One path, articulated philosophically by Dugin and reflected politically in the rise of ethno-nationalist authoritarianism and state-aligned religious institutions, leads towards fragmentation, the prioritization of collective identity over individual conscience, the embrace of conflict, and the subordination of universal ethics to geopolitical expediency. The other path, embodied by Francis, champions universal solidarity grounded in the inherent dignity of every person, advocates for dialogue and reconciliation, defends the autonomy of moral reasoning from state coercion, and calls for shared responsibility in addressing global challenges. It represents a wager on the enduring power of compassion and encounter in a world tempted by the perceived security of exclusion.

Assessing the ultimate impact of Francis's papacy remains a task for history. The forces arrayed against his vision – entrenched internal resistance within segments of the Church, the potent appeal of nationalist ideologies, the strategic deployment of disinformation by illiberal states, and the intellectual influence of thinkers like Dugin – remain formidable. Did his persistent call from the peripheries fundamentally alter the trajectory, offering a compelling and viable counter-narrative capable of inspiring sustained resistance to the siren song of weaponized faith and civilizational conflict? Or did his tenure primarily serve to illuminate the starkness of the choice, the depth of the divisions, and the fragility of the universalist project in the face of powerful particularist currents? The enduring questions posed by his challenging pontificate demand urgent and ongoing reflection, for they concern the very future of human coexistence in an increasingly fractured world.

References:

Agadjanian, A. (2018) 'Tradition, Morality and Community: Elaborating Orthodox Identity in Putin's Russia'. In: Agadjanian, A., Jödicke, A. and van der Zweerde, E. (eds.) Religion, Nation and Democracy in the South Caucasus. London: Routledge, pp. 243–266.

Agadjanian, A. and Rousselet, K. (2019) 'Modernity, religion and the war of values in Russia'. Politics and Religion, 12(1), pp. 113–134.

Alford, H.J. (2017) 'Pope Francis's vision of economy and the common good'. Journal of Catholic Social Thought, 14(2), pp. 231–245.

Ali, M.H. (2023) 'The Fourth Political Theory'. Journal of Ecohumanism, 3(2), pp. 177-184.

Allen, J.L. Jr. (2013) The Francis Miracle: Inside the Transformation of the Pope and the Church. New York: Time Books.

Almeida, P.D. (2008) Waves of Mobilization: Neo‐liberalism and Social Movements in Latin America. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

Arai, T. (2011) The Contested Legacy of Vatican II: Lessons for the Catholic Church in the Twenty‐First Century. London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark.

Argandoña, A. (2014) Economics in the Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii gaudium. IESE Business School Working Paper WP-1127. [Online]. Available at: https://www.iese.edu/media/research/pdfs/OP-0261-E.pdf (Accessed: 21 April 2025).

Åslund, A. (2019) Russia's Crony Capitalism: The Path from Market Economy to Kleptocracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Benedict XVI (2007) Apostolic Letter “Summorum Pontificum”. [Online]. Available at: [Vatican URL Placeholder] (Accessed: [Date Placeholder]).

Benedict XVI (2009) Encyclical Letter Caritas in Veritate, 29 June. [Online]. Available at: [Vatican URL Placeholder] (Accessed: [Date Placeholder]).

Berdyaev, N. (1949) The Origin of Russian Communism / The Russian Idea. (Representative work).

Brubaker, R. (2017) 'Between nationalism and civilizationism: the European populist moment in comparative perspective'. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 40(8), pp. 1191–1226.

Burgess, J. P. (2008) Holy Rus': The Rebirth of Orthodoxy in the New Russia. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. [Assuming publisher based on typical academic presses].

Burke, R.L., Brandmüller, W., Caffarra, C. and Meisner, J. (2016) Seeking Clarity: A Plea to Untie the Knots in Amoris Laetitia. [Online]. Available at: https://www.ncregister.com/ [Further publication details needed for formal citation] (Accessed: 21 April 2025).

Clover, C. (2016) Black Wind, White Snow: The Rise of Russia's New Nationalism. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Coppa, F.J. (2013) The Policies and Politics of Pope Pius XII: Between Diplomacy and Morality. New York: Peter Lang.

Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (2023) Declaration Fiducia Supplicans On the Pastoral Meaning of Blessings, 18 December. [Online]. Available at: https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20231218_fiducia-supplicans_en.html (Accessed: 21 April 2025).

Dinges, W.D. and Hitchcock, J. (eds.) (2018) Catholic Traditionalism: A Preliminary Inquiry. South Bend, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.

Dugin, A. (2012) The Fourth Political Theory. London: Arktos Media. [Assuming publisher based on typical distributors].

Equinet (2021) The Role of the Russian Orthodox Church in the Promotion of Traditional Values and its Impact on Human Rights. Brussels: Equinet. [Assuming publisher location].

Faggioli, M. (2012) Vatican II: The Battle for Meaning. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press.

Faggioli, M. (2015) Pope Francis: Tradition in Transition. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press.

Faggioli, M. (2020) 'Pope Francis Endorses Same-Sex Civil Unions. What Does that Mean?'. Commonweal Magazine, 21 October. [Online]. Available at: https://www.commonwealmagazine.org/pope-francis-same-sex-civil-unions (Accessed: 21 April 2025).

Flannery, A. (ed.) (1992) Vatican Council II: The Conciliar and Post Conciliar Documents. New revised edn. Northport, NY: Costello Publishing Company.

Francis (2013a) Holy Mass in the "Arena" sports camp, Lampedusa, 8 July. [Online]. Available at: https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/homilies/2013/documents/papa-francesco_20130708_omelia-lampedusa.html (Accessed: 21 April 2025).

Francis (2013b) Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, 24 November. [Online]. Available at: https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20131124_evangelii-gaudium.html (Accessed: 21 April 2025).

Francis (2015a) Misericordiae Vultus: Bull of Indiction of the Extraordinary Jubilee of Mercy, 11 April. [Online]. Available at: https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/bulls/documents/papa-francesco_bolla_20150411_misericordiae-vultus.html (Accessed: 21 April 2025).

Francis (2015b) Encyclical Letter Laudato Si', 24 May. [Online]. Available at: https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html (Accessed: 21 April 2025).

Francis (2016) Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia, 19 March. [Online]. Available at: https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20160319_amoris-laetitia.html (Accessed: 21 April 2025).

Francis (2017) Message for the 104th World Day of Migrants and Refugees 2018, 15 August. [Online]. Available at: https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/messages/migration/documents/papa-francesco_20170815_world-migrants-day-2018.html (Accessed: 21 April 2025).

Francis (2020a) Encyclical Letter Fratelli Tutti, 3 October. [Online]. Available at: https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20201003_enciclica-fratelli-tutti.html (Accessed: 21 April 2025).

Francis (2020b) Message for the Launch of the Global Compact on Education, 15 October. [Online]. Available at: https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/messages/pont-messages/2020/documents/papa-francesco_20201015_messaggio-global-compact-education.html (Accessed: 21 April 2025).

Francis and Al-Tayeb, A. (2019) Document on Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together, 4 February. [Online]. Available at: https://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/travels/2019/outside/documents/papa-francesco_20190204_documento-fratellanza-umana_en.html (Accessed: 21 April 2025).

Gaillardetz, R.R. (2003) By What Authority? A Primer on Scripture, the Magisterium, and the Sense of the Faithful. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press.

Geddes, A. and Scholten, P. (2016) The Politics of Migration and Immigration in Europe. London: Sage Publications.

Giles, K. (2019) Moscow Rules: What Drives Russia to Confront the West. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.

Granados, J., Kampowski, S. and Pérez-Soba, J.J. (eds.) (2017) Amoris Laetitia: Accompanying, Discerning, Integrating. Brooklyn, NY: Angelico Press.

Henry, L.A. and Douhovnikoff, V. (2018) 'Environmental issues in Russia'. In: Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Environmental Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/acrefore/9780199389414.013.578.

Hornbeck, J.P. and Radde-Antweiler, K. (eds.) (2016) Authorship and Authority in Pre-modern Religious Texts. Berlin: De Gruyter.

Hösle, V. (2021) 'Philosophical Reflections on Fratelli Tutti'. In: Human Fraternity and Inclusive Growth. Studia Selecta, 6. Vatican City: Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences. [Online]. Available at:https://www.pass.va/en/publications/studia-selecta/studia_selecta_06_pass/hosle.html (Accessed: 21 April 2025).

Hull, G. (2010) The Banished Heart: Origins of Heteropraxis in the Catholic Church. London: T&T Clark.

Ivereigh, A. (2015) The Great Reformer: Francis and the Making of a Radical Pope. Revised edn. London: Picador.

John Jay College of Criminal Justice (2004) The Nature and Scope of the Problem of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Catholic Priests and Deacons in the United States. Washington, DC: United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

Kasper, W. (2014) The Gospel of the Family. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press.

Keenan, J.F. (2011) ‘Clericalism, Accountability, and the Abuse of Children by Catholic Priests’. In: Plant, S. (ed.) Taking Down the Wall of Silence: Twenty-First Century Perspectives on Child Abuse. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers, pp. 45–56.

Kim, B.J. and Riedy, C. (eds.) (2017) Integral Ecology: Protecting Our Common Home. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

Knox, Z. (2017) Between Heaven and Russia: Religious Politics and the Russian Orthodox Church. Abingdon: Routledge. [Assuming publisher].

Krawatzek, J. and Feklyunina, V. (2018) 'Religious Representation in Russia-EU Relations: “Traditional Values” Problem'. Rocznik Integracji Europejskiej, 12, pp. 199-212. [Online]. Available at: http://rie.amu.edu.pl/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/rie-2018-12-21.pdf (Accessed: 21 April 2025).

Kwasniewski, P.A. (2016) Noble Beauty, Transcendent Holiness: Why the Modern Age Needs the Mass of Ages. Brooklyn, NY: Angelico Press.

Laine, N. (2024) 'Russian Exceptionalism: Mining and Re-Writing Religious History'. Public Orthodoxy, 30 December. [Online]. Available at: https://publicorthodoxy.org/good-reads/russian-exceptionalism-mining-and-re-writing-religious-history/ (Accessed: 21 April 2025).

Lambert, M.D. (1992) Medieval Heresy: Popular Movements from the Gregorian Reform to the Reformation. 2nd edn. Oxford: Blackwell.

Laruelle, M. (2015) 'The three colors of Novorossiya, or the Russian nationalist mythmaking of the Ukrainian crisis'. Post-Soviet Affairs, 32(1), pp. 55-74.

Laruelle, M. (2016) The 'Russian World': Russia's Soft Power and Geopolitical Imagination. Washington, D.C.: Wilson Center. [Assuming publisher based on typical affiliations].

Luciani, R. (2021) Synodality: A New Way of Proceeding in the Church. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press.

Luxmoore, J. and Babiuch, J. (1992) The Vatican and the Red Flag: The Struggle for the Soul of Eastern Europe. London: Geoffrey Chapman.

MacCulloch, D. (2004) The Reformation: A History. New York: Penguin Books.

Makarychev, A. and Medvedev, S. (2020) 'Biopolitical conservatism and the politics of gender in Russia'. Problems of Post-Communism, 67(4–5), pp. 365–382.

Mankoff, J. (2019) Russia's Foreign Policy: Ideas, Domestic Politics and External Relations. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Martimort, A.G. (1953) Le Gallicanisme. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

Massaro, T. (2015) Living Justice: Catholic Social Teaching in Action. 2nd edn. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Melloni, A. (2013) The Benedict XVI Conclave: The Pope is Ill and His Successor is Unknown. London: Continuum.

Mercier, C. (2012) Un Condamné à la difficulté d'être : homosexualité et Église. Paris: Karthala Editions.

Mickens, R. (2018) 'Pope Francis' Maundy Thursday Revolution'. La Croix International, 29 March. [Online]. Available at: https://international.la-croix.com/news/letter-from-rome/pope-francis-maundy-thursday-revolution/7181 (Accessed: 21 April 2025).

Mudde, C. (2019) The Far Right Today. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Murray, J. C. (1960) We Hold These Truths: Catholic Reflections on the American Proposition. New York: Sheed and Ward.

O'Brien, D.P. and Gonzalez, T.W. (2018) 'Globalization of Indifference: The Challenge of Pope Francis to Discipleship and Solidarity'. Journal of Religion & Society, Supplement 16 (Religion and Globalization), pp. 112-131. [Online]. Available at: https://cdr.creighton.edu/rjs/volSupplement16/iss1/11 (Accessed: 21 April 2025).

O'Malley, J.W. (2008) What Happened at Vatican II. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

O'Malley, J.W. (2013) Trent: What Happened at the Council. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

Osuji, P.I. (2017) '“Who Am I To Judge?” A Revival of the Primacy of Conscience and the Impact of Culture in the Formation of Conscience'. American Journal of Arts and Humanities, 2(1), pp. 1–10.

Ozment, S.E. (1980) The Age of Reform, 1250-1550: An Intellectual and Religious History of Late Medieval and Reformation Europe. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Pallotti, R. M. (2021) Pope Francis and the Caring Society. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

Papkova, I. (2016) The Orthodox Church and Russian Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Corrected publisher from previous potential assumption].

Polyakova, A. and Boyer, S. (2018) The Future of Political Warfare: Russia, the West, and the Coming Age of Global Digital Competition. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.

Pottier, H. (2010) ‘Le Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger et l'Afrique’. Recherches de Science Religieuse, 98(3), pp. 357–376.

Ratzinger, J. (Cardinal) (2005) Homily at Mass “Pro Eligendo Romano Pontifice”, 18 April. [Online]. Available at: [Vatican URL Placeholder] (Accessed: [Date Placeholder]).

Reid, A. (2017) ‘Continuity or Rupture? Pope Francis and the Roman Liturgy’. Antiphon: A Journal for Liturgical Renewal, 21(2), pp. 117–145.

Robinson, I.S. (2004) The Papacy, 1073-1198: Continuity and Innovation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rowland, T. (2017) Catholic Theology. London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark.

Runciman, S. (1947) The Medieval Manichee: A Study of the Christian Dualist Heresy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ryan Report (Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse) (2009) Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse Report. Dublin: Government Publications Office.

Rydgren, J. (ed.) (2018) The Oxford Handbook of the Radical Right. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Schuck, M.J. (1991) That Which Is Just: A Study of the Concept of Justice in the Social Teachings of the Popes Leo XIII through Pius XII. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.

Scribner, R.W. and Dixon, C.S. (2003) The German Reformation. 2nd edn. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Sedgwick, M. (2019) Against the Modern World: Traditionalism and the Secret Intellectual History of the Twentieth Century. Updated edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Shekhovtsov, A. (2017) Russia and the Western Far Right: Tango Noir. London: Routledge.

Spadaro, A. (2013) 'A Big Heart Open to God: An Interview With Pope Francis'. America Magazine, 19 August. [Online]. Available at: https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2013/09/30/big-heart-open-god-interview-pope-francis (Accessed: 21 April 2025).

Stella, F. (2015) ‘LGBT rights in post-Soviet countries: chronicles of a delayed emancipation’. Nationalities Papers, 43(1), pp. 4–10.

Stoeckl, K. (ed.) (2018) Russian Orthodoxy and Secularism. Leiden: Brill. [Assuming publisher based on typical academic presses].

Sullivan, F.A. (2002) From Apostles to Bishops: The Development of the Episcopacy in the Early Church. New York: Newman Press.

Tellenbach, G. (1993) The Church in Western Europe from the Tenth to the Early Twelfth Century. Translated by T. Reuter. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Tornielli, A. (2013) Francis: Pope of a New World. San Francisco: Ignatius Press.

Triandafyllidou, A. (2018) ‘A “Refugee Crisis” Unfolding: “Real” Events and Their Interpretation in Media and Political Debates’. Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies, 16(1–2), pp. 198–216.

Ullmann, W. (1970) The Growth of Papal Government in the Middle Ages: A Study in the Ideological Relation of Clerical to Lay Power. 3rd edn. London: Methuen.

Vorgrimler, H. (ed.) (1969) Commentaries on the Documents of Vatican II. New York: Herder and Herder. [Assuming publisher details].

Wilkinson, C. (2014) ‘Putting “traditional values” into practice: The rise and contestation of anti-gay rhetoric in Russia’. Russian Review, 73(2), pp. 201–223.

Wodak, R. (2015) The Politics of Fear: What Right-Wing Populist Discourses Mean. London: Sage Publications.

Wood, C.T. (ed.) (1967) Philip the Fair and Boniface VIII: State vs. Papacy. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. [Corrected to show Wood as editor, based on typical format of this series].

Wooden, C. and McElwee, J. J. (eds.) (2018) A Pope Francis Lexicon. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press.