She was one of the most beautiful and admired women in France. Her name was Eva Lavariere. Addicted to alcohol and tobacco, she was the lover of several men, including a marquis and a baron. Her life of sin made her utterly miserable. One night, after achieving one of her greatest triumphs in the theater before thousands of spectators, she felt so unhappy for lacking peace in her heart that she threw herself into the river to take her own life.
Fortunately, someone saved her life, and when she confessed to a priest, Christ Jesus restored peace to her soul. The happiness she had not found amid applause and sins, she discovered in a confessional upon feeling forgiven by the Lord. After a life of emptiness, she became Catholic in 1918 and joined the Secular Franciscan Order, taking the name Eva of Jesus.
Examining the evidence behind the “chosen successor” narrative
Ever since Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost was elected Pope Leo XIV of the Catholic Church, there have been attempts to portray him as Francis’s intended successor, as his protegé and closest collaborator. Such notions have been pushed by Christopher Hale and modernist commentators such as Austen Ivereigh, and recently Gerard O'Connell and his wife Elisabetta Piqué. Two things that these various narratives have in common are that they were constructed entirely after the fact and that they tend to show a blatant ignorance of curial politics.
Before Prevost was elected, few if any sources portrayed him as particularly close to Francis, nor was he said to be his intended successor. While Francis was ailing in the hospital, Zuppi was again rumored to be his desired heir; and Aveline as well, but not Prevost.
Yet, now it is suddenly claimed that Francis prepared Prevost to be his successor. Key to this narrative is the claim that Francis showed special favour to Prevost by making him bishop and later prefect and cardinal, as well as allegedly showing him membership in other dicasteries.
That Francis made Prevost a bishop is not indicative of personal favor at all.
- Prevost had not just been a two-time prior general of the Augustinian order, but also was a trained canon lawyer, ecclesial judge, missionary, mission director, rector of a seminary and seminary teacher. Being made a bishop was a completely logical next step which was to be expected.
- Chiclayo is a regular diocese, not an archdiocese. It’s not an exceptional position by any standard. Prevost also wasn’t moved from Chiclayo to a bigger archdiocese after a few years, as some of Francis’s favorites were. From 2014 till 2019 he served there as a bishop completely uneventfully, without any favors whatsoever.
- He was not invited to synods, given any curial functions or any meaningful honours. Had Francis died after about five years as Pope, something he suggested could happen early in his papacy, then Prevost would simply have been some local bishop he appointed in Peru.
- Prevost largely remained an unknown till 2023. For ten years of Francis’s papacy, he was largely invisible. Francis did make Prevost a member of the Dicastery for Bishops in 2019 and then of the Dicastery for the Clergy in 2020, but that rightfully got little attention. Francis appointed other smaller bishops to such dicastery memberships, without especially favouring them as well, including Bishop Gregory Bennet of the Diocese of Sale in Australia for the Dicastery for the Clergy and Bishop José Antonio Satué Huerto of the Diocese Teruel and Albarracín in Spain.
- Prevost's two memberships didn’t lead to anything else for years. Inside-sources are virtually unanimous on the fact that Prevost was not Francis’s first choice as prefect for the then Congregation for …
Father Nicola Bux on what Donald Trump has not understood and what Pope Leo has yet to say regarding the Church’s role in peace
Christ in the Storm on the Sea of Galilee by Rembrandt (1606–1669) (Wikimedia Commons).
Here below is a guest commentary by Father Nicola Bux, a priest of the Italian Archdiocese of Bari, a professor of theology, and a former consulter to the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith:
Popes from John XXIII to Leo XIV have, in different ways, separated the question of peace from the concrete reality of the Church; as a result, their appeals for peace risk becoming utopian — aspirations that lack the means necessary for their fulfilment.
This separation appears when peace is framed primarily as a political or humanitarian goal: ending wars, encouraging dialogue, and fostering cooperation among nations. These aims are good, but when they are presented without reference to the Church’s essential mission — the conversion of persons and peoples to Christ — they lose their foundation. Peace becomes an external arrangement rather than the fruit of an interior transformation.
The Gospel presents a different logic. After His Resurrection, Christ gives peace to His Apostles and immediately commands them to make disciples of all nations (Mt 28:19). The universality of this mission shows that peace is inseparable from the spread of the Gospel and the establishment of the Church. The Church is not merely a promoter of peace; she is its source in history, because she is the body of Christ, who is Himself our peace.
The early Christians understood this unity clearly. For them, peace and communion were inseparable realities. In the Church, divisions of language, ethnicity, and nation were overcome through a shared life in Christ. The inscriptions “pax” and “irene” on Christian tombs expressed the conviction that peace was fulfilled in communion with God and His people. Peace was not an abstract ideal but a lived experience grounded in faith.
When this connection is weakened, the pursuit of peace becomes superficial. Symbolic gestures and diplomatic efforts may express goodwill, but they cannot resolve the deeper disorder within the human person. As Isaiah teaches, “the work of justice will be peace” (Is 32:17), and justice depends on right relationship with God. Without conversion, there is no lasting moral order, and without moral order, peace cannot endure.
For this reason, the Church’s mission is indispensable. Faith comes from hearing the Gospel, and from faith comes conversion — a real change of life. Where this occurs, reconciliation, justice, and solidarity become possible. The spread of the Church is therefore not opposed to peacebuilding; it is its necessary condition. To speak of peace without proclaiming Christ is to propose an effect without its cause.
This helps explain why many modern appeals to peace appear ineffective. They call for universal fraternity without addressing how human beings can truly become brothers and sisters. Detached from the transformative power of the Gospel, such appeals remain aspirations rather than realities.
At the same time, charity requires recognizing that God can act through those outside the Church. Scripture shows this in figures who prophesy or act in God’s name without belonging to the visible community of believers. Political leaders, too, can contribute to peace in partial ways. Yet their role cannot replace the Church’s mission. When the Church adopts primarily political categories or is perceived as just another diplomatic actor, her identity is obscured and her message misunderstood.
This confusion is evident in contemporary tensions between political figures and the papacy. When the Pope is treated chiefly as a head of state, his evangelical mission is reduced to diplomacy. Conversely, when the Church does not speak clearly about conversion and moral truth, some believers seek clarity elsewhere, even in flawed political alternatives. This dynamic reveals a weakening in how the relationship between peace and the Church is understood.
The remedy is not to abandon calls for peace, but to ground them once more in their true source. The Pope and the bishops must place at the center the call that begins the Gospel itself: conversion to God. Peace will not come simply through negotiation or the balancing of interests, but through transformed hearts.
Only in this way can appeals for peace avoid becoming utopian. When peace is understood as the fruit of communion with Christ, and when the Church is recognised as the place where this communion is offered to all, it becomes a real — if never complete — possibility within history. The more the Church fulfils her mission, the more the conditions for peace take root in the world.
The anti Christian Belgian radio hosts who SMASHED statues of Jesus and Our Lady have had a belated and half hearted apology issued on their behalf:
'Eva and Dries apologize. The video was intended as a humorous act, and they underestimated how sensitive religious symbols can be. They understand that this was hurtful to some people and would make different choices today.
VRT considers it important that all its employees show respect for every religion. Our aim is not to compare religions, but to treat everyone's beliefs with care'
Like @BishopBarron points out, Project Hail Mary is drenched in Christian imagery.
A man named Grace inhabits the Hail Mary.
"Hail Mary, full of Grace..."
That's not an accident.
Wonderful film.
@GiancarloSopo
I just saw the much talked about film “Project Hail Mary.” It's very entertaining and uplifting and features a fine performance from Ryan Gosling. But what most intrigued me were the powerful Christian themes at play in it. The title, of course, refers to the Hail Mary pass in football, since the adventure undertaken is a fairly desperate attempt to save the planet. But it also becomes eminently clear that the reference is not just to football but to the Blessed Mother herself, for the Gosling character is undoubtedly a Christ-figure. I don't want to give away too much of the plot, but it involves a willingness to sacrifice one's life utterly in order to deliver the entire human race from disaster. It is, of course, no accident that Gosling's character is called Ryland Grace, for throughout the movie, his presence and actions constitute undeserved favor to others. A particularly intriguing character in the film is a sober German scientist who relentlessly presses Grace to make the supreme sacrifice, even when he is unwilling. She represented for me the great moral demand that presses upon us throughout our lives, continually summoning us to self-gift. A last observation: Jesus had a second in command whom he called Peter (the Rock); Ryland Grace has a very unusual sidekick whom he calls “Rocky.” I'll leave it at that.
I know lots of people say that Christianity is in irreversible decline and that we are inhabiting, at least in the West, a post-Christian society. I'm not so sure. Like it or not, we remain a Christ-haunted culture—and a film like “Project Hail Mary” makes this clear.
Card. Burke: "Prophétis meis"
-
Non relíquit hóminem nocére eis: et corrípuit pro eis reges.
Nolíte tángere christos meos: et in prophétis meis nolíte malignári.
-- Sanctae Mariae in Sabbat...