He said he doesn’t buy Jesus’ divinity, for instance, the latest headline-grabber:
After each such story, the Vatican has issued clarifications and disclaimers, telling the world that Scalfari’s interviews cannot be considered accurate. That line of defense is no longer plausible.
If Scalfari is not reliable, why is he granted interviews? More important, if Scalfari’s stories “cannot be considered as a faithful account,” why can’t the Vatican furnish something that could be considered a faithful account? What did the Pope say? [boldface added]
In this latest case, why couldn’t the Vatican announce, in clear contradiction of Scalfari’s claim, that of course the Holy Father holds and teaches what the Church has always held and taught? The stakes are far too high to accept another bout of uncertainty; the confusion is far too widely spread. The faithful need unequivocal assurance that the Bishop of Rome accepts the Nicene Creed.
I have a theory: Francis is a sort of Peck’s Bad Boy of the church. He gets a kick out of causing a fuss.
Besides, he plays to the gallery of priests and bishops the world over, including Jesuits, who just don’t believe in that stuff and instead are vaguely, somehow, leaning on their good deeds — protesting global warming, etc. — to get them in acceptable condition into whatever after-life there is.
Equal parts of both, I suppose.