Vatican spokesman issues statement contradicting words attributed to Pope by top Italian newspaper

Vatican Insider
July 14, 2014

http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/the-vatican/detail/articolo/francesco-francis-francisco-35242/

Fr. Federico Lombardi

“In the Sunday edition of La Repubblica an article by Eugenio Scalfari was prominently featured relating a recent conversation that took place with Pope Francis. The conversation was very cordial and most interesting and touched principally upon the themes of the plague of sexual abuse of minors and the Church’s attitude toward the mafia.”

“However, as it happened in a previous, similar circumstance, it is important to notice that the words Mr. Scalfari attributes to the Pope, “in quotations” come from the expert journalist Scalfari’s own memory of what the Pope said and is not an exact transcription of a recording nor a review of such a transcript by the Pope himself to whom the words are attributed. We should not or must not therefore speak in any way, shape or form of an interview in the normal use of the word, as if there had been a series of questions and answers that faithfully and exactly reflect the precise thoughts of the one being interviewed.”

“It is safe to say, however that the overall theme of the article captures the spirit of the conversation between the Holy Father and Mr. Scalfari while at the same time strongly restating what was said about the previous “interview” that appeared in La Repubblica: the individual expressions that were used and the manner in which they have been reported, cannot be attributed to the Pope.”

“Let me state two particular examples,” Lombardi says in his statement. “We must take into consideration two affirmations that have drawn much attention and that are not attributed to the Pope.  The first is that among paedophiles are also “some cardinals”; and the second regarding celibacy: “I will find solutions.”

“In the article published in La Repubblica, these two affirmations are clearly attributed to the Pope but curiously, the quotations were opened at the beginning but were not closed at the end. We must ask ourselves why the the final quotations are not present: is this an omission or explicit recognition that this is an attempt to manipulate some naïve readers?”