Remember Eugenio Scalfari, the Italian atheistic journalist who interviewed the pope several times but allegedly never bothered to record the proceedings of the interview? Supposedly he simply wrote from his memory. He reported some whoppers by the pope and immediately sent the Vatican press office into a tizzy; at least we're supposed to believe the tizzy was authentic. I actually think it was quite an act: the pope can let a little heresy out with the help of his friend, and when the resultant flack starts to fly, they can claim it was all just some sort of mistake. It's a neat way to insinuate heresies into people's minds while taking no responsibility for it, isn't it? Recall these incidents from last year. You'd think that if Scalfari really was misrepresenting the pope, that the pope would avoid him. In this latest interview from a few days ago, the pope and his press office may have tipped their hands.
Rorate obtained a translation of La Repubblica. It contained another "telephone interview" in which the pope said of divorced folks and Holy Communion with regards to the sin-nod outcome, "all the divorced who ask will be admitted". One question that popped immediately into my mind is, "if it's just divorced folks and not remarried, what's the problem?" Immediately following that another thought, a reply to my question, came; "if they're just divorced and not remarried, they wouldn't need to ask".
One Peter Five has a great analysis of this strategy of using Scalfari to insinuate heresies into unsuspecting minds. Well, maybe he isn't using Scalfari per se, but rather working in concert with Salfari. There's too much of a pattern now for us not to notice. I truly hope that the "it's not the pope's fault, he's just controlled by the Vatican meanies crowd" will finally acknowledge what is as plain as the noses on their faces.
May God help us all.
Update - Rorate Caeli has published a reply to the sin-nod's back-door attempt to admit de facto adulterers to Holy Communion, written by Bishop Athanasius Schneider. The length and depth of this reply causes me to believe that he did not have in mind this Scalfari interview (probably knew nothing of it at the time of his writing). Please read it on Rorate's site.
Trump Largely Wins One In the Supreme Court
2 hours ago