A disarming Avvenire

We are not, thankfully, dealing with the ramblings of the secretary of the Young Democrats: ‘We will not be the soldiers of your wars. For us, speaking of the homeland means rejecting war. We will organise the deserters’ (it should be noted in passing: in the days of the FGCI, the former dominant party of the left had more credible training schools). However, it is somewhat worrying that this absolutist “rejection of war” as the sole legitimate horizon bears a striking resemblance to the single-minded thinking on security and peace – that is, the defence of freedom – which cascades down from the upper echelons of the CEI onto the pages of *Avvenire*. *Gutta cavat lapidem*, if priests still know their Latin.

Yesterday, alongside an editorial by Marco Impagniazzo, president of Sant’Egidio, on the risk of civil war due to a lack of social empathy, the campaign for the citizens’ initiative on unarmed and non-violent civil defence featured prominently as the lead story: “A Mano disarmata – Over 50,000 signatures collected”. It reads: “A stunning sprint to the finish line. Another form of defence is now truly possible”. This represents the open support of the Italian Church – or at least its journalistic voice – for the proposed citizens’ initiative promoted by the Italian Network for Peace and Disarmament, Sbilanciamoci! and other supporters, including the ACLI. The objectives are commendable – the establishment of a department for unarmed civil defence and of Civil Peace Corps (a long-held utopian vision of Alexander Langer), and the empowerment of the civilian population. What gives cause for concern is the ongoing and ideological opposition, on the part of Avvenire, between this initiative – which is not an official position of the CEI – and any other stance, legitimately present even within the Catholic world, that diverges from the ‘rainbow’ pacifist movement. In the past, a wide variety of Catholic circles have put forward other popular legislative proposals on various topics, from the defence of the family to independent schooling, usually met with indifference from the hierarchy. In this case, however, the hierarchy has unilaterally chosen to espouse a single ideology. More disarming than disarmed.