Faith and Fascism: Catholic

Intellectuals in Italy, 1925–43 1st Edition

Jorge Dagnino (Auth.)
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/faith-and-fascism-catholic-intellectuals-in-italy-1925-4
3-1st-edition-jorge-dagnino-auth/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Biota Grow 2C gather 2C cook Loucas

https://textbookfull.com/product/biota-grow-2c-gather-2c-cook-
loucas/

Strangers in a strange land living the Catholic faith

in a post Christian world First St. Martin'S Griffin
Edition Chaput

https://textbookfull.com/product/strangers-in-a-strange-land-
living-the-catholic-faith-in-a-post-christian-world-first-st-
martins-griffin-edition-chaput/

Ideological Seduction and Intellectuals in Putin’s

Russia Dmitry Shlapentokh

https://textbookfull.com/product/ideological-seduction-and-
intellectuals-in-putins-russia-dmitry-shlapentokh/

Mexican Public Intellectuals 2014th Edition D. Castillo

https://textbookfull.com/product/mexican-public-
intellectuals-2014th-edition-d-castillo/
Catholic theology after Kierkegaard 1st Edition Furnal

https://textbookfull.com/product/catholic-theology-after-
kierkegaard-1st-edition-furnal/

Keratoconus Recent Advances in Diagnosis and Treatment

1st Edition Jorge L. Alió (Eds.)

https://textbookfull.com/product/keratoconus-recent-advances-in-
diagnosis-and-treatment-1st-edition-jorge-l-alio-eds/

Faith and Heritage A Christian Nationalist Anthology

Faith And Heritage

https://textbookfull.com/product/faith-and-heritage-a-christian-
nationalist-anthology-faith-and-heritage/

Introduction to Probability and Statistics Metric

Edition 1925-2009) Mendenhall

https://textbookfull.com/product/introduction-to-probability-and-
statistics-metric-edition-1925-2009-mendenhall/

Cyberspace Safety and Security 10th International

Symposium CSS 2018 Amalfi Italy October 29 31 2018
Proceedings Arcangelo Castiglione

https://textbookfull.com/product/cyberspace-safety-and-
security-10th-international-symposium-css-2018-amalfi-italy-
october-29-31-2018-proceedings-arcangelo-castiglione/
HISTORIES OF THE SACRED AND SECULAR

Faith and Fascism

Catholic Intellectuals
in Italy, 1925–43

Jorge Dagnino
Histories of the Sacred and Secular, 1700–2000

Series Editor

David Nash
Department of History
Oxford Brookes University
Oxford, United Kingdom
Aims of the Series
This series reflects the awakened and expanding profile of the history of
religion within the academy in recent years. It intends publishing exciting
new and high quality work on the history of religion and belief since
1700 and will encourage the production of interdisciplinary proposals and
the use of innovative methodologies. The series will also welcome book
proposals on the history of Atheism, Secularism, Humanism and unbelief/
secularity and to encourage research agendas in this area alongside those
in religious belief. The series will be happy to reflect the work of new
scholars entering the field as well as the work of established scholars. The
series welcomes proposals covering subjects in Britain, Europe, the United
States and Oceana.

More information about this series at

http://www.springer.com/series/14868
 Jorge Dagnino

Faith and Fascism

Catholic Intellectuals in Italy, 1925–43
Jorge Dagnino
Institute of History
Universidad de los Andes
Santiago, Chile

ISBN 978-1-137-44893-4    ISBN 978-1-137-44894-1 (eBook)

DOI 10.1057/978-1-137-44894-1

Library of Congress Control Number: 2016959976

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2017

The author(s) has/have asserted their right(s) to be identified as the author(s) of this work
in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the
Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of
translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on
microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval,
electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now
known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are
exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information
in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the
publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to
the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made.
The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional affiliations.

Cover Illustration © INTERFOTO / Alamy Stock Photo

Printed on acid-free paper

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by Springer Nature

The registered company is Macmillan Publishers Ltd.
The registered company address is: The Campus, 4 Crinan Street, London, N1 9XW,
United Kingdom
 Acknowledgments

It is a pleasure to be able to thank a number of people and institutions

that have encouraged and contributed to the completion of this book. My
warmest gratitude goes to Professors Martin Conway and John Pollard,
who read the entire manuscript and invariably provided insightful com-
ments as well as support.
In Rome I received the patient assistance at several archives and librar-
ies; the Archivio Centrale dello Stato, the Istituto per la Storia dell’Azione
cattolica e del movimento cattolico in Italia Paolo VI, the Biblioteca Luigi
Sturzo, and the Biblioteca di Storia Moderna e Contemporanea.
I would also like to express my gratitude to the journals Contemporary
European History and the Journal of Modern Italian Studies, for granting
me copyright permission for work previously published in these distin-
guished publications.
The research for this book would have been impossible without the
generous assistance of my FONDECYT grant project N. 3140039.
Finally, I am enormously indebted to my family for their unyielding
love and support during these years. My parents Monica and Jorge, my
three brothers and my three nephews have unfailingly provided with
much-needed joy across the years.
This book is dedicated to the memory of my grandfather Julio Dagnino,
who passed away during the writing of this monograph.

v
 Contents

1 Introduction   1

Part 1 The FUCI 1925–3313

2 The FUCI and the Conquest of the Modern World:

1925–1933  15

3 The Architecture of the City of God: Politics and

Society During the Montini-Righetti Era  29

4 The FUCI and Fascism, 1925–33  45

Part 2 The FUCI 1933–39  63

5 A Path to Modernity: The Fuci in the 1930s  65

6 The Crisis of Civilisation and the Sacralisation of Politics

in 1930s Europe  87

vii
viii Contents

7 FUCI Ideas in the 1930s: The Search for a

New Spiritual Order 119

8 Building the New Order, 1933–39 141

Part 3 The FUCI 1939–43181

9   Catholic Students at War: The FUCI 1940–43 183

10 The FUCI 1943–45: The Path to Post-Fascism 209

Bibliography225

Index245
 CHAPTER 1

Introduction

This is a study of the main ideological developments and currents of the

Federazione Universitaria Cattolica Italiana (FUCI) between 1925 and
1943; that is, the period during which the Fascist regime enjoyed its great-
est power. The FUCI was the official organisation for the laity of Italian
Catholic Action for the university sector and still exists today.1
As such, it was an important element of the lay Catholic world within
Fascist Italy, as well as having a wider presence within Italian society.
Thus, the study of the FUCI provides a means of studying the dynamics
of Catholicism within Fascist Italy. At the same time, however, the FUCI
has a wider significance for the study of Catholic politics and intellectual
ideas within Italy, as a remarkably large proportion of the future Christian
Democrats who would rule the destinies of the country after the Second
World War received much of their intellectual training in the ranks of the
federation.2 Additionally, in the 1925–33 period, the central ecclesiastical
assistant of the organisation was Giovanni Battista Montini, the future
Pope Paul VI.
Despite its importance, the existing literature on the FUCI is still some-
what sparse and mostly of apologetic nature, perhaps due to the fact that
the overwhelming majority of the studies have been written by former
fucini, as the members of the association were known. Moreover, the bulk
of the existing historiography on the FUCI has unsurprisingly tended to
focus on the formation of the Christian Democrat elite and the intellectual

© The Author(s) 2017 1

J. Dagnino, Faith and Fascism, Histories of the Sacred and Secular,
1700–2000, DOI 10.1057/978-1-137-44894-1_1
2 J. DAGNINO

and religious itinerary of the future pontiff, Paul VI. Many of these studies
have been characterised by a limited sense of a proper historical dimension
and have neglected other important aspects of the history of the FUCI,
such as its place within lay Catholic life in the 1920s and 1930s, and its
engagement with the principal intellectual trends of the time. It is these
shortcomings that this study sets out to address.3

Structure
Broadly speaking, this book is divided into three parts and an epilogue. It
follows a chronological structure that coincides with the three presiden-
cies that marked the history of the association during the period under
study. Thus, the first part extends from 1925 to 1933, when the FUCI
was led by Igino Righetti and Giovanni Battista Montini; the second
from 1933 to 1939 when the organisation was presided over by Giovanni
Ambrosetti; and, finally, the last part is devoted to the years 1939 to 1943
when the federation was under the rule of the young Aldo Moro and
Giulio Andreotti.
According to the prevailing interpretations, the FUCI of the 1925–33
period was characterised by an intellectual openness and the willingness
of the federation to enter into a fruitful dialogue with the modern world,
which eschewed the attitude of condemnations and anathemas that was
common to many Catholic circles of the time. Moreover, in the political
domain, the federation is commonly presented as having been immune to
the attractions of Fascism or, indeed, directly anti-Fascist. In contrast to
this predominant view, it is argued in the present study that the FUCI in
this era was characterised by a high degree of ambiguity and ambivalence
with regard to the modern world and modernity in general. Moreover, in
my analysis, a much more conservative Montini and FUCI emerge—an
association that was not devoid of a spirit of conquest and of a militant and
intransigent Catholicism, fuelled by a vision of an ideological and totalis-
ing Catholicism.
The first part ends with the examination of the relationship between
the Catholic student association and Fascism. Undoubtedly these were
troubled times for the FUCI, marked by the violent clashes that occurred
at the national congress of Macerata in 1926 and, above all, by the crisis
of 1931 in relations between the church and the Fascist regime over the
youth groups of Catholic Action. While the majority of the leaders of
the organisation had no Fascist sympathies, within the rank and file the
 INTRODUCTION 3

s­ ituation was different. By 1929, 50 % of the fucini were also members of

the Fascist University Groups and the numbers continued to rise through-
out the period.4 It is, therefore, difficult to define the FUCI as anti-Fascist
even during the Montini-Righetti administration. A similar ambivalence
characterised the response on the part of the Catholic students to the
signing of the Lateran Pacts in February 1929. Above all, there was a
widespread sense among the fucini that the pacts—and especially the con-
cordat—were a great triumph for the cause of Catholicism in Italy and a
great historical opportunity to reaffirm the primacy of the spiritual over
material and secularising tendencies.
The history of the association between 1933 and 1939 has generally
been portrayed as a time of conservatism and cultural conformism, which
marked the high point of the appeal of Fascism among the fucini. Instead,
it is contended in this chapter that this period was a crucial one in the
development of an alternative form of Catholic modernity, and that, in
this respect, the encounter with some aspects of Fascism was a fruitful one,
enabling the FUCI to maintain an individual identity. The 1930s were a
pivotal time for the engagement of the church and the FUCI with mod-
ern aspects of life such as technological advances, urbanisation, cinema,
youth consciousness, new models of sainthood and religious behaviour,
the tenets of mass society, and major organisational developments within
the structures of the church that modified its traditional models of pres-
ence in society.
An important aspect of this evolution concerned the response of the
fucini to the phenomenon of the sacralisation of politics or the emergence
of political religions during the 1930s. Despite the recent proliferation of
publications on this topic, the perspective of contemporary Catholics has
rarely been investigated. This section seeks to fill this void by analysing
the reactions of the Catholic intellectuals to the political religions estab-
lished by Bolshevik Russia, National Socialist Germany, and Fascist Italy.
I stress the point that the fucini viewed the emergence of political reli-
gions in totalitarian states not just as a simple historical regression to bar-
baric times, but also as a by-product of modernity itself. Indeed, for some
Catholic intellectuals the notions of totalitarianism, political religions, and
modernity formed part of an interrelated cluster of concepts.
Faced by the novel challenge presented by the so-called ‘political reli-
gions’, the university students of the 1930s were well aware of the need to
offer a new type of religiosity, attractive to the new generations. Above all,
this religiosity had to be in line with the needs of an emerging mass society.
4 J. DAGNINO

Christianity was presented as a palingenetic force, as an integral revolution

capable of mobilising the masses in an effort to sacralise them in an age of
mass politics and secularisation. Against the fragmentation of modern men
and women, within a liberal individualist society, Catholicism offered a
unifying and organic vision capable of transcending the deleterious effects
of the liberal version of modernity that so badly needed to be countered.
Thus, the picture that emerges from this analysis of the FUCI of the 1930s
is their often-creative engagement with the issues of modernity. In par-
ticular, the book analyses the fascination exercised over the imagination of
the Catholic students by such modern features and figures as the engineer,
technology, the world of the professions, cinema, and Fascist-style corpo-
rativism as manifestations of the dawn of a new epoch.
The last substantial section analyses the years during which the FUCI
was run by Aldo Moro and Giulio Andreotti. Its main purpose is to exam-
ine the attitudes of the Catholic students during the Second World War
and dispel the myth that before, or at the beginning of the conflict, the
student association became anti-Fascist. On the contrary, it is demon-
strated that the support given by the fucini to the Italian war effort lasted
well into the conflict. Above all, this final chapter deals with the religious
experience of the FUCI during the Second World War. It contends that
the most salient features of the war experience of the university students
are to be located in the spiritual domain and in their effort to contrive a
religiosity adapted to warfare and modernity in general, interlaced with
the powerful myth of a Catholic Italy that, at least in the early stages of the
conflict, fuelled the expectations of many in the federation of the primor-
dial role to be played by Italy in a new world order.
Finally, the epilogue deals with the years 1943–45, that is, after the col-
lapse of the Fascist regime. Contrary to what has generally been assumed,
namely that the vast majority of the Catholic intellectuals immediately
joined the ranks of the Christian Democrat party after the demise of
Mussolini, it is argued and demonstrated that for many fucini the transition
to this political formation was far from being a smooth passage. Moreover,
it is contended that the Catholic students during these two crucial years in
Italian history were concerned with more pressing issues such as liberation
and reconstruction, and fears of the death of the nation. Furthermore, a
gulf existed between the fucini and the pre-1922 Popular Party of Luigi
Sturzo and Alcide De Gasperi. Rather than following the call of the latter
for a united political front of Italian Catholics, many Catholic students and
ecclesiastical assistants, such as Emilio Guano, opted for a line of political
 INTRODUCTION 5

pluralism. The epilogue concludes by analysing the case of Aldo Moro as

an excellent example of these trends.
With regard to primary sources, besides journals, periodicals, and other
printed material, my research has benefited from the consultation of the
following archives: the Archivio Centrale dello Stato, the Archivio della
Presidenza della FUCI, the Archivio del Movimento Laureati, the Archivio
della Presidenza Generale dell’ Azione Cattolica, the Archivio Luigi
Grondona, and the Archivio Emilio Guano. Indeed, one of the principal
innovations of this book concerns the wide range of archival sources upon
which it is based. Many of these sources have not been formerly exploited
by historians of the FUCI in any great detail. This enables a much more
detailed picture to be reconstructed of the dynamics of the organisation. I
have, however, been at pains throughout to eschew an organisational his-
tory of the FUCI. This constitutes the most familiar aspect of the history
of the federation, but tends to lead to a neglect of the way in which the
fucini—in common with Catholic student groups elsewhere—constitute
an important example of the wider ideological militancy in the interwar
years. Instead, this book is principally concerned with matters of Catholic
thought and ideology during the Fascist regime. Thus, I have therefore
given emphasis to the substantial publications of the FUCI, most notice-
ably their periodical Azione fucina and their journal Studium, as well as to
the other writings of fucini that shed light on their intellectual evolution.5
In doing so, I hope that this work provides not only an innovative history
of the FUCI, but also contributes to the wider history of Catholic intel-
lectual life in Europe during these tumultuous decades.

The History of the FUCI

As an introduction to the material which follows, it might be useful pro-
vide a brief overview of the FUCI and its principal figures. The FUCI was
founded in September 1896 as a branch of Catholic Action, dedicated,
as has been recalled, to work among Italy’s university student popula-
tion.6 For the purposes of this study, the years that followed the Great
War are particularly significant in the history of the federation. During
this period, the organisation was characterised by its tight relationships
with the Partito Popolare Italiano (PPI) founded by the Sicilian priest
Luigi Sturzo in 1919—a link, however, that would progressively weaken
during the following years. These were difficult years, as a consequence
of the Fascist seizure of power in 1922. Fascism did not look favourably
6 J. DAGNINO

upon an organisation that sought to exercise an autonomous role within

the world of Italian universities and which thus stood in sharp contrast to
the regime’s totalitarian aspirations in educational matters. Additionally,
the FUCI had to face some difficult moments within the Catholic move-
ment and the papacy itself which, in its aim to distance itself and aban-
don the Popular Party in order to bring about a rapprochement with the
Fascist regime, sought to curtail some of its traditional prerogatives and
autonomy. This was manifested, above all, by the new statutes for Catholic
Action of 1923, the main features of which were its increasing centralisa-
tion and subordination to clerical control of the lay body.7
At the national congress of the FUCI of 1925, celebrated in Bologna,
the Catholic students made the mistake of placing the event under the
patronage of the Italian king, a gesture which, in a period when the Roman
Question was still unresolved, provoked the fury of Pius XI. This led to
the resignation of the then-central ecclesiastical assistant of the federation,
Luigi Piastrelli, and the national president Pietro Lizier.8 Moreover—and
more importantly for the history of the organisation—the Vatican hence-
forth ended the FUCI’s tradition of autonomy, expressed notably by the
democratic election of their national leaders. From then on, all nomina-
tions would be made directly by the Vatican. It was in this troubled con-
text that Giovanni Battista Montini and Igino Righetti were designated
as central ecclesiastical assistant and national president of the association,
respectively.
Giovanni Battista Montini was born in Concesio near Brescia in 1897,9
into a family of upper middle class that was very active in the Catholic
movement of the day. His father Giorgio was one of the most distinguished
exponents of the Brescian Catholic movement and one of the founders—
and later parliamentary deputy for—the Partito Popolare Italiano together
with personalities such as Luigi Sturzo. He was also an active journalist
and directed the Catholic periodical Il Cittadino di Brescia.10 Thanks to
his father, the young Giovanni Battista would become acquainted, from a
very early age, with the leading personalities of the Catholic movement of
his region and of the PPI in particular.
The young Montini received his education at the Jesuit-run institu-
tion Cesare Arici, characterised by the strong classical training given to its
pupils, and a traditionalist religious education. At the same time, Montini
frequented the church and Philippine Oratory of Santa Maria della Pace.
It was here that he became acquainted with Father Giulio Bevilacqua—
who would exercise a strong influence upon him, as will be seen—and
 INTRODUCTION 7

who would become a frequent contributor to the FUCI press and works.11
During his pontificate, Paul VI would nominate Father Giulio Bevilacqua
as cardinal. At the Oratory he also became acquainted with Father Paolo
Caresana, who eventually became his personal confessor. Another impor-
tant experience in the biography of the young Giovanni Battista Montini
was his collaboration with the periodical La Fionda, edited by his friend
Andrea Trebeschi, who would die in a Nazi concentration camp in 1945.
Montini quickly rose to a position of leadership at the periodical, which
promoted a religiosity lived as a source of societal renewal after the tragedy
of the Great War—a conflict that the young fiondisti had supported with a
fervent spirit of patriotism.
In the meantime, Giovanni Battista was developing a strong religious
vocation that reached its culmination when he was ordained to the priest-
hood in 1920. On this occasion, Luigi Sturzo sent him a telegram of con-
gratulations.12 After his ordination, Montini moved to Rome, where he
enrolled himself in the Faculty of Philosophy at the Pontifical Gregorian
University and, simultaneously, at the Faculty of Languages and Philosophy
at the University of La Sapienza, with the aim of enriching his humanis-
tic formation. Nevertheless, these academic endeavours, which were very
dear to the young Montini, were rapidly interrupted when the cardinal
Secretary of State, Pietro Gasparri, ordered him to join the Pontifical
Academy of Nobili Ecclesiastici—the institution where the diplomats of
the Vatican were formed. In May 1923 he was sent on a diplomatic mis-
sion to Warsaw, where he would stay for a period of six months. After his
return to Italy, in October 1924, he entered the Vatican’s State Secretariat,
where he would remain until he was designated archbishop of Milan thirty
years later. At the end of November 1923 he was nominated ecclesiastical
assistant of the Roman branch of the FUCI, and in 1925 he was elevated
to the rank of central ecclesiastical assistant of the organisation, a position
that he held until his departure in 1933.
Igino Righetti (1904–39)13 was a native of Rimini. He went to the liceo
Luigi Galvani of Bologna and from a very early age displayed an interest
and passion for social and political affairs. Initially, he was a follower of
the nationalistic youth movement. In 1921 he became secretary, in his
native Rimini, of the revitalised Popular University. In the period before
the Great War, the Popular University had been an institution inspired by
a socialist-democratic spirit and, during Righetti’s secretariat, it changed
to an organisation that, although not formally religious, was respectful of
religion. Righetti rapidly developed the qualities that were later to make
8 J. DAGNINO

him well known in his period as president of the FUCI, namely his abili-
ties as a cultural organiser and leader that allowed him to convince persons
much older than himself, and of diverse ideological views to collaborate in
the activities of the Popular University.
In the academic year 1922–23, he enrolled in the Faculty of Law at the
University of Bologna, though there is no evidence that he participated
in the activities of the local FUCI chapter during his stay in the city.14 In
January 1924 he relocated to the University of Rome to continue his law
studies. While living in the capital he continued his collaboration with his
native Rimini, this time as contributor to the Catholic periodical L’Ausa.
He also participated as secretary of the Diocesan Assembly of Catholic
Action at Rimini, of which he was for a brief period also president. While in
Rome, the young Igino Righetti became acquainted with Father Giovanni
Genocchi, who was actively involved in the life of the Roman branch of
the FUCI, and who convinced Righetti to join the FUCI at the beginning
of the academic year 1924–25, of which he would become the national
president after the national congress of September 1925 in Bologna.
Before dealing with the principal outcomes of this research, it might
be useful to provide some basic data regarding the FUCI. With regard
to the social background of the fucini, the overwhelming majority came
from the educated middle classes.15 Furthermore, many of the students
did not come from the structures of Catholic Action but were recruited
directly at the university level. Indeed, most of them had been educated in
state schools rather than in private and confessional ones, a feature which
distinguished the students from the other branches of the lay organisation.
Another interesting feature of the Catholic university students was that
proportionately few of its members enrolled themselves at the Catholic
University of Milan of Father Agostino Gemelli.16
The FUCI was present throughout Italy, but its principal strongholds
were in Lombardy, Venetia, Emilia Romagna, Campania, Puglia, and
Sicily. In 1928, the FUCI had 48 branches in the north, 23 in central Italy,
and 15 in the south. These numbers had risen by 1942–43 to 64 groups
in the north, 43 in central Italy, and 66 in the south. In the academic year
1928–29, the federation was composed of 2370 members, a figure which
rose in the years 1946–47 to 7055, in line with the overall growth of uni-
versity students on the peninsula. During the 1930s, the all-male branch
of the FUCI was able to recruit around 5 % of the whole Italian univer-
sity population, while the female branches of the association were able to
enlist 10 % of all young women who attended higher education.17 As such,
 INTRODUCTION 9

the FUCI—although it was not a mass organisation in Fascist Italy—was,

nevertheless, capable of attracting some of the best minds among Italian
youth, a feature that gave it its distinct elitist dimension. Moreover, this
latter characteristic was in large part responsible for the strong sense of
militancy and spiritual cleansing that characterised the organisation.
Within the Catholic world of Fascist Italy, the FUCI was a prominent
organisation and was by far the most sophisticated and influential in intel-
lectual terms. After the Second World War, the federation faced new chal-
lenges within the context of the newly born Italian Republic. The FUCI,
for example, contributed 35 of its former members to the Constituent
Assembly of 1946. Another challenge that the Catholic students had to
confront in the post-war period was the reality of the organisational struc-
tures of Catholic Action. Especially after the elections of April 1948, with
the founding of the civic committees, the prevailing trend within the lay
body was one of electoral and political mobilisation. In the face of this
reality, the FUCI strenuously defended its sphere of autonomy as an intel-
lectual grouping committed to serious work of apostolate among univer-
sity students.
During the 1950s, the federation had to face the reality of rapid eco-
nomic growth that, together with the modernisation of society, was accel-
erating the course of secularisation. In response, the FUCI felt the urgent
need to address the problems and anxieties that were afflicting modern
men and women, as well as imposing upon itself the task of breaking the
barriers that existed between daily life, culture, and spirituality. As a con-
sequence, the role and participation of Catholics in the life of society was
the most pressing issue of the 1950s for the FUCI.
During the 1960s and early 1970s, the association underwent a crisis of
identity. The emergence of direct democracy, spontaneous groups, and the
wider radical transformation of established structures of association under
the pressure of movements of global contestation could not but provoke
a deep crisis of purpose and identity within the FUCI. This, however, did
not lead to its dissolution. Instead, the organisation took the principal
themes from the message of the Second Vatican Council (1962–65) in
order to construct the FUCI around the so-called scelta religiosa or reli-
gious option—an alternative that privileged the vision of Catholicism as
spiritual ferment of the contemporary world. It is this vision of the FUCI
that has prevailed to the present day.
10 J. DAGNINO

Notes
1. Histories of the Italian Catholic Action and more broadly of Italian
Catholicism in the modern era abound. See, for example, D.I. Kertzer, The
Pope and Mussolini. The Secret History of Pius XI and the Rise of Fascism in
Europe (Oxford, 2014); J. Pollard, The Papacy in the Age of Totalitarianism,
1914–1958 (Oxford, 2014); L. Ceci, Il Vaticano e l’Italia di Mussolini
(Rome and Bari, 2013); J. Pollard, ‘Pius XI’s Promotion of the Italian
Model of Catholic Action in the World-Wide Church’, Journal of
Ecclesiastical History, 63/4 (2012), 758–84; idem, Catholicism in Modern
Italy. Religion, Society and Politics since 1861 (London and New York,
2008); F. Traniello, Religione cattolica e Stato nazionale. Dal Risorgimento
al secondo dopoguerra (Bologna, 2007); A. Acerbi (ed.), La Chiesa e
l’Italia. Per una storia dei loro rapporti negli ultimi due secoli (Milan,
2003); G. Verucci, La Chiesa cattolica in Italia dall’Unità a oggi
1861–1998 (Rome and Bari, 1999); E. Preziosi, Obbedienti in piedi. La
vicenda dell’Azione Cattolica in Italia (Turin, 1996); M. Casella, L’Azione
cattolica nell’Italia contemporanea (1919–1969) (Rome, 1992);
M. Guasco, Dal Modernismo al Vaticano II. Percorsi di una cultura religi-
osa (Milan, 1991); G. Penco, Storia della Chiesa in Italia nell’età contem-
poranea 1919–1945 (Milan, 1985); A. C. Jemolo, Chiesa e Stato in Italia.
Dalla unificazione agli anni settanta (Turin, 1977); P. Scoppola, La Chiesa
e il fascismo. Documenti e interpretazioni (Bari, 1971) and D. A. Binchy,
Church and State in Fascist Italy (Oxford, 1941).
2. Aldo Moro, Giulio Andreotti, Paolo Emilio Taviani, Guido Gonella,
Giovanni Leone, Emilio Colombo, Mariano Rumor, Amintore Fanfani,
Mario Scelba, to name but just a few, were all active members of the FUCI.
3. For studies of the FUCI see T. Torresi, L’altra giovinezza. Gli universitari
cattolici dal 1935 al 1940 (Assissi, 2010); M. C. Giuntella, La FUCI tra
modernismo, partito popolare e fascismo (Rome, 2000); FUCI. Coscienza
universitaria, fatica del pensare, intelligenza della fede. Una ricerca lunga
100 anni (Milan, 1996); R.J. Wolff, Between Pope and Duce. Catholic
Students in Fascist Italy (New York, 1990); R. Moro, La formazione della
classe dirigente cattolica (1929–1937) (Bologna, 1979); and G. Fanello
Marcucci, Storia della FUCI (Rome, 1971).
4. R. Moro, La formazione della classe dirigente cattolica, 91.
5. While both Azione fucina and Studium essentially dealt with the same top-
ics in their pages, Studium, being a monthly journal could do so in more
depth and in a more scholarly fashion than could the weekly Azione fucina.
See A. Majo, La Stampa Cattolica in Italia. Storia e documentazione
(Casale Monferrato, 1992), 180–82.
 INTRODUCTION 11

6. For the history of the FUCI previous to 1925 see, for example, R. J. Wolff,
Between Pope and Duce, 1–11, and G. Fanello Marcucci, Storia della FUCI,
17–115.
7. M. Casella, L’azione cattolica, 68–71.
8. For these incidents see, for example, M.C. Giuntella, La FUCI, 135–37;
R. Moro, La formazione della classe dirigente cattolica, 63–5 and G. Fanello
Marcucci, Storia della FUCI, 113–16.
9. There is a veritable publishing industry around the figure of Giovanni
Battista Montini-Paul VI, albeit of a very uneven scholarly value. See, for
example, F. De Giorgi, Mons. Montini. Chiesa cattolica e scontri di civiltà
nella prima metà del Novecento (Bologna, 2012); G. Adornato, Paolo
VI. Il coraggio della modernità (Milan, 2008); M. Mantovani and M. Toso
(eds.), Paolo VI. Fede, cultura, università (Rome, 2003); E. de la Hera, La
noche transfigurada. Biografía de Pablo VI (Madrid, 2002); A. Acerbi,
Paolo VI. Il papa che baciò la terra (Milan, 1997); J.L. González-Balado,
Vida de Pablo VI (Madrid, 1995); C. Cremona, Paolo VI (Milan, 1994);
P. Hebblethwaite, Paul VI. The First Modern Pope (New York, 1993);
Educazione, Intellettuali e Società in G.B. Montini-Paolo VI (Brescia,
1992); and Paul VI et la modernité dans l’Église (Rome, 1984).
10. On Giorgio Montini see A. Fappani, Giorgio Montini. Cronache di una
testimonianza (Rome, 1974).
11. On Father Giulio Bevilacqua see, for example, L’impegno religioso e civile di
p. Giulio Bevilacqua (Brescia, 1983) and A. Fappani, Padre Giulio
Bevilacqua prete e cardinale sugli avamposti (Verona, 1975).
12. G. Adornato, Paolo VI, 20.
13. On Igino Righetti, see G. Benzi and N. Valentini (eds.), Igino Righetti.
Una giovinezza pensante (1904–1939) (Rome, 2006); N. Antonetti, La
FUCI di Montini e di Righetti. Lettere di Igino Righetti ad Angela Gotelli
(1928–1933) (Rome, 1979); I. Righetti, Itinerari (Rome, 1959); and
A. Baroni, Igino Righetti (Rome, 1948).
14. A. Baroni, Igino Righetti, 24.
15. I have retrieved the following data from R. Moro, La formazione della
classe dirigente cattolica, 26ff.
16. Agostino Gemelli (1878–1959) was a tremendously powerful figure in
Fascist Italy. He converted to Catholicism in 1903, followed by his entry
into the Franciscan Order. He was ordained in 1908. In 1909 he founded
the Rivista di filosofia neoscolastica, followed in 1914 by the maiden issue of
Vita e Pensiero. He participated actively during the First World War as med-
ical captain and distinguished himself in the consecration of Italian soldiers
to the Sacred Heart. After the end of the conflict he saw the importance of
a Christianity-inspired political party. In 1919 he put forward an argument
that the PPI should be a confessional political organisation—a contention
12 J. DAGNINO

that was rejected. In 1921 he fulfilled one of his most cherished dreams
with the foundation of the Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore in Milan.
Additionally, Father Gemelli supported many of the stances of Mussolini’s
government. On Gemelli, see, for example, M. Bocci, Agostino Gemelli,
Rettore e Francescano. Chiesa, Regime, Democrazia (Brescia, 2003).
17. R. Moro, La formazione della classe dirigente cattolica, 27.
 PART 1

The FUCI 1925–33

 CHAPTER 2

The FUCI and the Conquest of the Modern

World: 1925–1933

The prevailing interpretations in the historiography of the FUCI during

the period of 1925–33—that is, of the years when the organisation was led
by Giovanni Battista Montini and Igino Righetti—tend to underscore the
alleged openness and willingness of the federation to enter into dialogue
with the modern world, with a positive stance to rescue what was true and
good in it, and not with the attitude of condemnation and anathemas that
was so common in Catholic circles of the time. Instead of an approach
characterised by a categorical negation of the features of the modern
world and of modernity in general, the FUCI supposedly endeavoured
to rescue the characteristics of the times that could be brought into line
with the spirit of Catholicism, always sensitive to the needs and yearnings
of modern men and women. This is especially the case for the depiction
of the thought and activities of the central ecclesiastical assistant Giovanni
Battista Montini. Thus stated Peter Hebblethwaite, in his noted biogra-
phy of the future pontiff entitled Paul VI. The First Modern Pope.1 More
recently, Giselda Adornato has published a biography of Paul VI with the
suggestive title Paolo VI. Il coraggio della modernità (Paul VI. The courage
of modernity).2 According to Richard J. Wolff, in the only English account
of the history of the association, the hallmark of the Montini-Righetti
administration was the profound belief of its members in the compatibility
of faith and reason, scientific research and the secular and religious realms.3
For his part, Giovanni Battista Scaglia has insisted on the FUCI’s—and

© The Author(s) 2017 15

J. Dagnino, Faith and Fascism, Histories of the Sacred and Secular,
1700–2000, DOI 10.1057/978-1-137-44894-1_2
16 J. DAGNINO

especially Montini’s—openness to the values of modern culture and to

the notion of true liberty and personhood as core characteristics of the
organisation during these years.4 Along similar lines, Massimo Marcocchi
has argued that what was central to the FUCI between 1925 and 1933
was the conscious effort to build a bridge between the church and the
modern world in order to create a harmonious balance and not to hide
behind defensive trenches or sterile anathemas—an attitude that was so
common among many intransigent Catholic circles of the time.5 For her
part, Maria Cristina Giuntella affirms that the FUCI’s cultural approach
was one devoid of traditional apologetics and spirit of conquest, concen-
trating its efforts rather on transforming culture as a means of dialogue
with the modern world.6 Following a similar interpretation, the foremost
historian of the FUCI, Renato Moro, has asserted that the cultural line
of the FUCI under Montini and Righetti was one of assimilation, not of
conquest of the modern world. Furthermore, he insists that the approach
adopted by the Catholic intellectuals tried to create a just balance between
modernity and tradition, capable of rescuing what was true and vital in the
modern world. According to Moro, during this period the FUCI refused
to engage in stances of a priori condemnations, opting instead for a seri-
ous and impartial analysis of secular culture, leaving behind any legacies
of fanatical anti-modernism or a categorical disapproval of the modern
world.7 Finally, Antonio Acerbi has written of Montini’s ‘extraordinary
sensitivity for comprehending and appreciating the aspirations, feelings
and thoughts of his contemporaries’.8
In contrast to this consensus, it is argued in this chapter that, while
there is certainly some degree of truth to their assertions, the picture they
depict is incomplete. Instead it is proposed that there was a high degree of
ambiguity and ambivalence with regard to the modern world and moder-
nity in general. Moreover, in the analysis that follows, a much more con-
servative Montini and FUCI emerge, an association that was not devoid of
a spirit of conquest or of militant Catholicism, as will be seen. To a large
extent, the cultural line followed by the fucini was one of a wholehearted
condemnation of many aspects of the modern world and was animated
by an intransigent spirit of restoration of a Christian society, fuelled by a
vision of an ideological and totalising Catholicism.
As has been stated, the vision of the FUCI as open to the modern
world, sensitive to its needs and yearnings, does have some partial ground-
ing in fact. Fausto Montanari, a FUCI activist, admitted that what pulled
many youths of his day away from the Catholic Church was its image as
 THE FUCI AND THE CONQUEST OF THE MODERN WORLD: 1925–1933 17

‘a closed system that imposed the renunciation of everything that was

beautiful beyond it’.9 Montanari went on to propound the need to leave
behind a mentality of purely negative criticisms and to live Christianity
in a more optimistic and fruitful way, with an eye to finding what was
worthwhile in the modern world. Similarly, Giovanni Battista Montini,
although in general a harsh critic of contemporary civilisation, at times
recognised that perhaps ‘our intransigence has been sterile and separatist
… and for that reason it has not formed consciences’.10 In another article,
and perhaps more forcefully, the ecclesiastical assistant acknowledged that
throughout history the church had not always given the secular world the
attention that it deserved and that this was a great failure of the virtue
of charity: ‘We often ignore this world that surrounds us … we ignore
it because we do not love it as we should; and we do not love it, simply
because we do not love’.11
However, these statements should not lead us to consider the FUCI
in the 1925–33 period as an open or progressive association, confident
in its relationship with modern culture and its manifold manifestations.
On the contrary, what was most apparent in its attitude to the modern
world in these years was a spirit of combat and conquest of contemporary
civilisation.

The Conquest of the Modern World

The Catholic Church, since at least the French Revolution, had depicted
with horror the modern world as an entity characterised by a spirit of
laicism, worship of the state, subjectivism and relativism, as well as an ever-­
growing lack of public morality and religious indifference, if not atheism.12
For many in the FUCI the history of civilisation since the Middle Ages was
visualised as a progressive development of corruption, departures from
the orthodoxy defended by the church, if not the history of sin. Many
Catholic intellectuals in the ranks of the association shared this perspec-
tive, and thus sought as the only remedy to this malaise the figure of a
militant Catholic Church, developing what can be called a ‘fortress men-
tality’ among its members. Vincenzo Arcozzi Masino fully embodied this
mentality. He spoke of the diverse FUCI branches across Italy as blessed
places where one ‘could breathe a purer and healthier air than the one we
are constrained to breathe outside, in the society that is not ours’.13 For
Arcozzi Masino, the alleged vast spiritual crisis that still affected his age
began after the Middle Ages, in a new configuration of the state and the
18 J. DAGNINO

concept of sovereignty, whereby progressively the nation state was born

and the state started to assume roles that had customarily been the privi-
lege of the church. In this fashion the ‘universal spirit’ of medieval times
was forever broken, and since then the world had lived in a perpetual cri-
sis. He went on to protest at how in nearly every country education and
marriage were secular, how the pontiff was excluded from the League of
Nations, among other manifestations of laicism. In this fashion, the church
had lost every opportunity to regain its right and duty to assume its appro-
priate directing role over society. In Arcozzi Masino’s view, Catholics had
to react in a firm, energetic way to the spirit that animated modern civilisa-
tion—that is, laicism, atheistic philosophy, humanism and the rest ‘of the
human degenerations’.14
For his part, the Dominican Mario Cordovani called upon the fucini to
launch a strenuous struggle against laicism and subjectivism in the world
of the universities. In the Dominican’s outlook, these flaws of the contem-
porary world had led people to measure everything according to purely
human standards and to immediate success, annihilating any trace of a
true spiritual dimension on earth. He called upon the university students
to become ‘soldiers of Christ’ in an effort that was not about ‘adapting
ourselves to the others, but rather how to elevate all to the divine truth’.
In sum, the Catholic intellectuals’ duty was how to ‘render the world
Christian and not how to render mundane Christianity’.15
Others, in what was a common mindset in many European Catholics
during the interwar years, traced the roots of the crisis of modern society
to the beginnings of the Renaissance, where they saw the birth of bour-
geois civilisation that led to the development of a philosophy of the senses
and positivism. The Renaissance was to blame for shattering the suppos-
edly harmonious balance that had existed during medieval times between
spirit and matter, which had reached its apex during the thirteenth cen-
tury. From then on incoherence of thought and life and spiritual unrest
had prevailed in the world. Afterwards, with the French Revolution, mat-
ters had turned for the worse, with a gigantic impulse from man to con-
struct a universe where God was neglected and ignored, a world based
solely on the faculties of man.16 This in turn led to a mechanistic and
restless conception of human life, to a sense of adventure for adventure’s
sake, where the final and transcendental goal vanished from the horizon of
men’s minds, guiding the contemporary world to a frightening reality of
extreme spiritual poverty.17
 THE FUCI AND THE CONQUEST OF THE MODERN WORLD: 1925–1933 19

Certainly one of the harshest detractors of modern times among the

Catholic intellectuals was Guido Gonella, who conducted a systematic
campaign of denunciation against the so-called evils of modernity.18 He
denounced the twentieth century as a time of wanderers, hopeless people
who could not even begin to think of the supranatural goods. He sol-
emnly proclaimed that ‘we are anti-twentieth century because we are for
the aristocracy of the spirit. We need to create the aristocracy of the repre-
sentative men, that is of the good and virtuous since only virtue is worthy
to be represented.’19 Such an elitist conception was common within FUCI
branches of the time, that is the notion that they were a selected group of
youth destined to restore everything in Christ and to rule the destinies of
the nation in the future. Moreover, Gonella held modernity responsible
for the loss of the primacy of the religious dimension of life. In histori-
cal terms, he traced the roots of this evolution to Luther, Descartes, and
Rousseau. With Luther, modernity had been directed along the path of
sheer protestant individualism. For his part, Descartes was to blame for
constructing a purely rationalistic philosophy that left aside the transcen-
dental. Finally, Rousseau had introduced into the modern world a subjec-
tive, romantic, and revolutionary spirit that could only lead to anarchic
revolts. Modernity was an entity where there prevailed experience, senti-
ment, subjectivity, criticism, immanence, and rebellion. Guido Gonella
summed up his position in apocalyptic terms by stating that ‘perhaps today
we are more diabolic because modernity has taught us very well how to
divinise sin’.20 Gonella, like many fucini during the 1925–33 period, did
not exhibit a spirit of dialogue or pluralism with the modern world. For
Gonella and others the path was clear: to re-conquer the modern world
for Catholic dogma, because only in Catholicism was the whole and abso-
lute truth found. Moreover, ‘Catholicism is the spirit of every genuine
civilisation’.21
Another aspect of twentieth-century culture that Gonella detested was
the excess of technology. While he gave a lukewarm support to technology
as an unavoidable reality in modern times, he firmly rejected any notion
that it should become an end in itself.22 What he primarily abhorred about
technology was that it fragmented the world and man into a myriad of
small and insignificant compartments, leading people to live a mechanistic
life, losing sight of an integral and unitary conception of human existence.
He attributed its origins to a philosophy of positivism and empiricism that
recognised no other reality than the one perceived through the senses. He
was convinced that contemporary man was living in a ‘machine c­ ivilisation’
20 J. DAGNINO

and that the world was nothing more than a ‘great wheel’ that had lost
its sense of mystery, enchantment, and beauty. He was deeply convinced
that ‘technology has petrified life and upset the scale of human values’.23
The crisis had been further deepened by the ever-growing presence of
anti-intellectual and irrationalistic tendencies present in contemporary
society. Gonella presented the modern world as a place over-populated
by men enslaved by the power of material interests and the allure of the
senses. Moreover, these men and women of the twentieth century were
frequently obsessed with utilitarian concerns like the ‘demon of business
and gain’, which had led to the divinisation of the practical over the specu-
lative life.24 This in turn had guided twentieth-century humanity, in the
social, literary, philosophical, political, and artistic realms, among others,
to a feverish and compulsive desire to start everything anew, breaking any
kind of link with previous traditions, in a hopeless effort to inaugurate a
utopian new world. Gonella had no doubts in speaking of the ‘pathologi-
cal character of this very modern mentality’.25
Guido Gonella was one of the Catholic intellectuals who developed a
systematic and logically coherent line of criticism of the modern world.
Giovanni Battista Montini was, perhaps, the other member of the FUCI
to conduct a systematic denunciation of the errors of contemporary
civilisation, although, as has been seen, he occasionally demonstrated a
degree of openness to modern society. Like Gonella and the anti-modern
Maritain, he located the origins of the disquiet of the modern world and
modernity in Luther—the ‘anti-teacher’, in Rousseau—the theorist of the
contemporary democratic regimes and ‘theoretician of the revolution’,
and finally in the subjectivism of Descartes. He bitterly commented on
how in the secular and rationalistic modernity ‘free enquiry, universal suf-
frage and systematic doubt’ had become dogmas that no one dared to
question,26 endangering the sole source of truth that was the Catholic
Church. Montini went on to distinguish between healthy and unhealthy
criticism. The former was an invaluable tool in every intellectual discipline,
while the latter constituted a ‘corruption’. Indeed, in criticism, the eccle-
siastical assistant saw the core of the modern world, a means transformed
into an end in itself, a ‘toxin’ that contaminated the men and women of
his time.27 Criticism for criticism’s sake had cut man off from the universal
truths that had to be rescued if the contemporary world were to be res-
cued from its ongoing predicament. But, in place of universal truths and
hierarchies of values, modern society exhibited a pitiful spectacle where
men and women wandered aimlessly and frenetically, giving free rein to
 THE FUCI AND THE CONQUEST OF THE MODERN WORLD: 1925–1933 21

their darkest impulses and instincts, leading a feverish, convulsed, obses-

sively dynamic, and more violent—and ever-rapid—life.28 In another writ-
ing, the ecclesiastical assistant qualified his times as a period dominated by
an activistic, anti-rational, and anti-ethical mentality, a revolutionary age
that sought to destroy everything that was worthy of the human spirit.29
Moreover, modern man, trained in the spirit of corrosive criticism and
subjectivism, infatuated with rationalism had built an autonomous ethics,
based upon his passions, utopias, and aberrations, and all this while con-
temporary society impassively assisted in the demolition of the ‘aristocratic
conception of life inherited from the Middle Ages’.30 Montini admonished
the men and women of his time to reconcile themselves with tradition,
‘our best spiritual patrimony … and her medieval faith’.31 Montini pre-
sented tradition not as a fossilised entity but rather as a vital and dynamic
source of civilisation, and of true human progress. It was also a guarantee
against those who thought ‘novelty should be sought through revolution
rather than through renovation’.32 Tradition further taught to love and
cherish the true hierarchy of human values, such as the family, the church,
the home, language, and fatherland, among others. The ecclesiastical
assistant had no hesitations in this regard: ‘tradition is the vital identity of
Catholicism’.33 In his defence of tradition, Giovanni Battista Montini went
as far as advocating the papacy of the reactionary Pius IX. He even posi-
tively evaluated Pius IX’s Syllabus of 1864. In the mind of Montini, this
ecclesiastical text was ‘instead of being a document of senile intransigence,
a statement that had shown the path to the blossoming of Catholic spiri-
tual youth’.34 In fact the Syllabus had been an integral condemnation, an
expression of total revulsion on the part of the papacy towards secular and
rationalist modernity. It rebuked, among other characteristics that were
developing in the modern world, liberty of conscience and thought, the
secularisation of the state, the non-confessional school, and philosophical,
historical, and scientific rationalism. It concluded by stating that it was a
fundamental mistake to think ‘that the Roman Pontiff can and should rec-
oncile himself with progress, liberalism and modern civilisation’.35
In Montini’s line of thought, the supreme responsibility of the Catholic
intellectuals was to conquer and convert the modern world—a world that
had lost its spiritual pillars. For Montini, the main task was to impose on his
age principles, sacred ideas, and eternal wisdom.36 In this sense, according
to the ecclesiastical assistant of the fucini, a spirit of ‘conquest’ and ‘com-
bat’ had to prevail in the battle to win back modern society to the Catholic
ranks.37 Only by following this path would Catholicism recover its eternal
22 J. DAGNINO

right to ‘govern modern conscience’.38 Montini went on to state that in

the present extreme and critical condition of Western civilisation, the sole
way to influence and channel the modern world back to Christian dogma
was to assume a ‘sharp intransigence of ideas and customs’, an intransi-
gence that in Montini’s perspective was the best manner to preserve the
purity of the practice and doctrine of Christianity.39 He finally admonished
the university students to assume the ‘integralism of their own faith’.40 In
sum, in Montini’s mind, one of the main tasks of the FUCI of his time was
to infuse into the Catholic youth of his age the conscience of pertaining
to a ‘vigorous militia’, the role and principal responsibility of which was to
restore the principles and Christian traditions into the twentieth century.41
The principal challenge facing these FUCI intellectuals was how to
reconcile this somewhat utopian desire of conquering the modern world
with an integral vision of Catholicism. In the 1925–33 period, the FUCI
returned to two principal instruments to achieve their goals: the insis-
tence on forming a militant or ideal fucino—from contemporary men
and women the sense of the absolute, a sense that only Thomism could
recover. Only Aquinas—the ‘apostle of modern times’—could resolve the
most pressing predicaments and contradictions affecting the people of the
twentieth century; nature and the supernatural, intellectualism and volun-
tarism, among others.42
Others in the Catholic organisation went on to proclaim Aquinas as
a national glory, a sort of nationalisation of Aquinas’s figure, thereby
uniting religion and love of the fatherland. For example, the Dominican
Mario Cordovani, proclaimed Aquinas as ‘our greatest national glory’,
and Thomism as ‘one of the noblest affirmations of Italianism and
Catholicism’.43 Likewise, the Jesuit Paolo Dezza ridiculed those Italian
philosophers who followed Hegel as an example of a sad ‘servitude’ and
all the others who were devotees of ‘exotic philosophies’, while Thomists
developed the superior task of acting as apologists for ‘our religion and
for our identity as Italians, developing a highly patriotic duty … through
exalting the most radiant philosophical glory of the Italian genius’.44
No account of the history of neo-Thomism in the FUCI during the
1925–33 period would be complete without making a reference to the
influence exercised by the French philosopher Jacques Maritain,45 espe-
cially upon Giovanni Battista Montini.46 Some have exaggerated this
influence, like Elvira Sepe, for whom Jacques Maritain represented for
the FUCI during the years under consideration a new cultural direction
that differentiated it from the rest of the Italian Catholic cultural world,
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 in tabes dorsalis,

831

Stammering,

571

Starvation as a cause of cerebral anæmia,

781

condition of brain in,

781

782

Status epilepticus, prognosis of,

498
 Vertiginosus, the,

426

Treatment of,

428

Stigmatization,

348-351

Theories concerning origin,

350

Stimulants, use, in heat-exhaustion,

388

in collapse in opium habit,

673

,
675

in thermic fever,

397

Stomach, disorders of and changes in, in chronic alcoholism,

600

Strabismus in chronic hydrocephalus,

743

in tubercular meningitis,

727

Strychnia, use, in alcoholism,

641

,
643

646

in chorea,

455

in infantile spinal paralysis,

1157

in intracranial hemorrhage and apoplexy,

978

in labio-glosso-laryngeal paralysis,

1175

in paralysis agitans,

438

in spinal hyperæmia,
805

in writers' cramp,

538

Myelitis, acute,

822

823

Stupor in tubercular meningitis,

727

728

Melancholia with,

158
Stuttering,

569

571

Suicidal insanity,

146

tendency, in general paralysis of the insane,

191

Sumbul, use, in hysteria,

278

Sun, exposure to, as a cause of acute meningitis,

716
Sunstroke (see

Thermic Fever

).

headache from,

390

404

Influence on causation of cerebral hyperæmia,

764

Superficial neuralgia,

1211

Supposed discharge as a cause of cerebral hyperæmia,

766
 of spinal hyperæmia,

802

Supraorbital nerve, intermittent neuralgia of,

1233

Surgical treatment of abscess of the brain,

800

of facial neuralgia,

1234

of tumors of the brain,

1067

Sweating, absence of, in progressive unilateral facial atrophy,

696

in the opium habit,

657

658

Swedish movement, use, in hysteria,

280

in infantile spinal paralysis,

1157

Sympathetic cervical, diseases of,

1263

headache,

404
 neuralgias,

1220

Symmetrical gangrene,

1257

Symptoms of abscess of the brain,

795

of acute alcoholism,

587

et seq.

of acute cerebral anæmia,

776

782
 of acute myelitis,

816

of acute simple meningitis,

717

of acute spinal meningitis,

750

pachymeningitis,

747

of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis,

868

of angina pectoris,

1238

of apoplexy,
733

of athetosis,

459

of atrophy of the brain,

994

995

of Bell's palsy,

1203

of capillary embolism,

981

of catalepsy,

320

of cerebral anæmia,
782

of cerebral hyperæmia,

768

of cerebral meningeal hemorrhage,

712

of cerebral softening,

981

989

of cerebral syphilis,

1003

of chorea,

445

of chronic alcoholism,
598-633

of chronic cerebral meningitis,

721

of chronic hydrocephalus,

741

of chronic lead-poisoning,

682

of chronic spinal meningitis,

752

of chronic spinal pachymeningitis,

749

of combined forms of sclerosis,

870
 of concussion of the brain,

908

of concussion of the spine,

915

of congestion of cerebral dura mater,

704

of spinal membranes,

747

of the pia mater,

716

of delirium tremens,

627

of diffuse spinal sclerosis,

888
 of disease of cervical sympathetic,

1264

of disseminated (cerebro-spinal) sclerosis,

874

of ecstasy,

342

of epilepsy,

477

of external pachymeningitis,

704

of family form of tabes dorsalis,

871

of gastralgia,
1238

of general paralysis of the insane,

178

of hæmatoma of dura mater,

707

of headache,

402

of heat-exhaustion,

387

of hebephrenia,

172

of hypertrophy of the brain,

944-946
 of hypochondriasis,

154

of hemiplegia,

954

of hypertrophy of the brain,

99

of hysteria,

229

of hystero-epilepsy,

293

of infantile spinal paralysis,

1114

of inflammation of the brain,

791
 of injuries to nerves,

1183

1185

1186

of insanity,

120

of insomnia,

379-382

of intermittent neuralgia of supraorbital,

1233

of internal pachymeningitis,

706
 of intracranial hemorrhage and apoplexy,

733

of labio-glosso-laryngeal paralysis,

1170

of melancholia,

155

156

of migraine,

407

1230

of moral insanity,

143-146

of multiple neuritis,