'It is impossible to invent something as exotic as the Vatican'.
Javier Cercas likes to describe his book as a non-fiction novel, a mixture of chronicle, autobiography and biography (of Pope Francis). "It is impossible to invent something as exotic and extraordinary as the Vatican. Believe me, it's totally impossible. Why would I make it up?" The Vatican opened its doors wide to him and for two years he was able to meet a whole series of high-ranking officials.
"It's part of what was unusual about this pope. He was able to open doors. The Church had never done that before, opening the doors of the Vatican to a writer to ask questions, to talk, to discuss, to see whatever he wanted to see and to write whatever he wanted to write," explains Cercas.
He accepted the commission despite not being a believer. "For me it was an extraordinary opportunity. I have sometimes been asked: how could you accept something like this, being an atheist and anti-clerical? My answer is: how could I not accept something like that?
Javier Cercas travelled with Pope Francis to Mongolia where he was able to speak with missionaries and even with the pontiff himself. To write the book he had to overcome his own prejudices and his wife's warning that he could end up whitewashing the Church.
When asked if Pope Francis was a revolutionary, he responds with reflection. "If by revolutionary you mean a pope who has changed Christian doctrine, the answer is no. He has not changed anything against what they say. He has changed nothing against what the forerunners say or it is irrelevant what he has changed. Now, if by revolutionary we mean a Pope who tries, as Vatican II wanted, to return to the primitive Church, then yes," says the Spanish writer.
Cercas prefers to speak of a disruptive Pope because "for many people in the hierarchy, for many priests, but also for many ordinary Catholics, he has been very disturbing".
From his conversations in the Vatican, he concludes that Pope Francis raised many fundamental issues, such as the role of women in the Church or paedophilia, and tried to put the means to solve them. But things are moving slowly in an institution with so many centuries of history. "This idea that the Pope does whatever he wants is false. It's one of the things that we lay people think works like that. But it doesn't work like that. The Pope cannot do whatever he wants".
In his opinion, Pope Leo XIV will continue the reforms of his predecessor, but respecting the forms and with greater moderation. He recalls that Pope Francis, already on the first day, appeared on the balcony of St. Peter's Basilica without the papal vestments, while Leo XIV wore them. "The outcome of this conclave is a pope, to a large extent, who will be a continuation of Francis, I have no doubt," he says. But the changes may be slow, since, according to Cercas, "to carry out this revolution you don't need one pope, you need 55 popes".
He explains that the American Robert Prevost has at least two facets that could mark the character of his pontificate. "First of all, he is a missionary. And that is the cleanest, most luminous part of the Church". But, according to Cercas, he also belongs to another part that he describes as "more suspicious", the Vatican. "This man was a man who was also in the Vatican, who was part of the curia by decision of Francis himself".
In his book, Cercas poses many theological questions to his interlocutors in interviews that he transcribes throughout the book. And almost obsessively he wants to reach the Pope to ask him about the "resurrection of the flesh" and, more specifically, whether his mother, who is a believer, will be able to be reunited with his father after death. But to find out if the Pope's answer convinced his mother, you have to read God's Fool: "That's at the end of the book. I can't tell you."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euronews
35 minutes ago
- Euronews
Here's everything you need to know about Iran's naval power
As attention turns to how Iran might respond to the recent U.S. strikes, a key question is the extent to which it can target American interests in Gulf waters. Despite the ongoing confrontation, Iran's navy has so far played no visible role in the conflict with Israel. This raises the question: is the regime in Tehran leveraging its naval fleet, and what capabilities does it actually possess? While Iran is often seen as a primarily continental power, the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman represent both its first and last lines of defense. Since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, Tehran has worked to build a layered naval structure divided between the regular army and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), combining larger warships and smaller attack boats, conventional submarines, and drones. Though Iran's navy is not capable of competing with the world's major naval powers, it has developed a specialized force based on asymmetric warfare, indigenous technology, and strategic deployment ensuring it remains a constant threat to any hostile move in the Strait of Hormuz or the Gulf of Oman. The Iranian Navy (IRIN) is the official branch responsible for operating the country's regular naval fleet, including submarines and larger warships. It comprises over 18,500 personnel and more than 100 vessels, including ships and submarines. Its operations span both the Persian Gulf and the Caspian Sea, focusing on protecting Iran's territorial waters, securing vital shipping lanes, and deterring any violations of Iranian sovereignty. According to Global Firepower's 2024 report, Iran's navy ranks 37th out of 145 naval forces worldwide. While this position does not place it among the global superpowers, it reflects the growth of Iran's naval capabilities despite international sanctions and technological constraints. The ranking suggests that Iran maintains a capable medium-sized naval force, strong enough to assert its presence within its regional sphere of influence. The most prominent feature of the fleet is its considerable diversity, which includes: Perhaps the most notable component of Iran's fleet is its submarine force, which includes between 19 and 27 submarines. Among them are three Tareq-class (Kilo-class) diesel-electric submarines, which have been used in strategic operations such as mine-laying and cruise missile launches. Iran also has two Fateh-class submarines and a large number of Ghadir-class mini-submarines, which are manoeuvrable in shallow waters. Although Tehran does not currently possess any nuclear-powered submarines, it has been pursuing this goal for years. In 2018, Iranian officials announced plans to build nuclear-powered submarines, but technology and international sanctions remain a barrier to realising this ambition. Iran's diving fleet does possess a collection of units with relatively advanced capability: Iran is seeking to improve the capabilities of these submarines by installing air-independent propulsion (AIP) systems, which will increase their ability to stay underwater for longer periods of time and give them greater operational capability. Iran's naval bases are spread across two geographical regions: North (Caspian Sea) and South (Persian Gulf and Gulf of Oman). Each base plays a different role, from manufacturing to logistical support for combat operations. In addition to these bases, there are IRGC-specific bases, such as the Sirik base near the Strait of Hormuz, and the Abu Musa base on Abu Musa - one of the islands disputed with the UAE - along with Tamb al-Sughra and Tamb al-Kubra. Abu Musa houses missile defence systems and underground fortifications. Unlike the regular fleet, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy (IRGCN) relies on a different type of operation, known as asymmetric warfare , which includes the use of fast missile boats, mine-laying, and hit-and-run attacks. This force includes: These forces do not have large ships or submarines, but they are characterised by speed and manoeuvrability, making them a constant threat to any hostile naval presence. Modern equipment and advances in capabilities In August 2024, the Iranian Navy received 2,640 missile and drone systems, including cruise missiles that are untraceable by radars. It also conducted successful cruise missile launch tests from a small submarine, an indication of an evolving offensive capability. In 2023, an Iranian naval group completed a journey that lasted more than eight months, during which it travelled 63,000 kilometres, and reached the Strait of Magellan in a first of its kind. The fleet included the Dana destroyer and the Makran support ship, in a clear message that Iran wants to expand its reach into international waters.
Euronews
an hour ago
- Euronews
Only regime change will stop Iran making a nuclear weapon
Only regime change will completely neutralise the threat that Iran will develop nuclear weapons, however successful 'Operation Midnight Hammer' may have been, though it will cement support for Trump domestically, an expert on foreign policy has told Euronews. Euronews interviewed Jacob Kirkegaard, senior fellow at the Bruegel Institute, on the American air strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities. Kirkegaard said the attacks might eventually bring the world closer to closer to the end, as Iran has very limited tools to escalate the situation. According to the expert, Iran could choose to retaliate against either US bases by killing a number of US troops, or against the crude oil facilities, either by hitting the transportation through the Strait of Hormuz or some of the facilities in the Gulf Arab neighbours of Iran. But Kirkegaard said he thought both options "a low probability" because Iran today is "at a nearly historically weak military position". According to the expert, Iran's proxies, like Hamas, Hezbollah, or the Houthis, are weakened and the US could join a broader military campaign if Iran hits American targets. "This is the risk that the Iranians know that Trump has proven he's actually willing to pull the trigger. And they need to take it seriously. I don't think we're headed for more escalation, but on the other hand, does this bring a negotiated peace settlement or a return to an agreed international nuclear surveillance, sort of a JPCOA 2.0, any nearer? The risk is that I think the US and the European countries are now going to want a more intrusive JPCOA that Iran may or may not agree to. So I think the possibility of an accelerated peace move is there, but it is absolutely no certainty," he said. Iran might still be able to produce a nuclear bomb Kirkegaard said that for the moment, nobody knows how much damage the Iranian nuclear sites have suffered. If the Natanz and Isfahan sites are disabled, "this will make weapons-grade uranium enrichment more difficult", he said. "But that may not matter very much. Because the latest data from the International Atomic Energy Agency suggested that Iran had about 400 kilos of enriched uranium, up to 60 percent. That is, if further enriched, more than enough to produce a nuclear weapon, provided you have the technical know-how to do so, weaponize it. We don't know if Iran has that, but what it means is that destroying these facilities, even if they are successfully destroyed, isn't going to destroy the Iranian nuclear program." With a possibly large amount of highly enriched uranium hidden in the country, Iran may still be capable of building a nuclear bomb, he said. "Iran remains a nuclear threshold power, maybe not quite as near as it was 24 hours ago, but a country that could, if the regime decided to go all out to produce a bomb, might very well still be capable of doing so." He added that as a result, there is no military solution for the Iranian programme unless there is a regime change in the country. Trump will be remembered as a president who bombed Iran Kirkegaard said that despite Trump's aspiration to be a peacemaker in Ukraine, he will be remembered as the president who bombed Iran. "He's going to forever be the US President who bombed Iran. So whenever he's criticized by certainly the more hawkish elements of the US political firmament... he will always have, 'look, I bombed Iran'. What did Obama do? What did Biden do? What did even Bush do?" Trump will thereby deter criticism within the MAGA camp, according to the analyst, and he will certainly not cross the red line of sending troops to Iran. "The only thing where I think he will remain inhibited, but he's no more inhibited than any other president, is that you're not gonna have boots on the ground. You're not going to have a US actual invasion of Iran, which obviously would be a disaster for everyone involved. He knows that he's not gonna do that. But he has shown to the people who call him TACO and thought he was gonna chicken out, he showed them." Europe is irrelevant in the conflict Jacob Kirkegaard said Europe will be irrelevant in the conflict, but many leaders on the continent are happy that Israel, together with the US, is destroying Iran's nuclear and missile programme. "I think we have to say that the brief window of European diplomacy that we had on Friday with the meeting in Geneva went nowhere. The Iranians told the E3 foreign ministers that they are not interested in pursuing a deal that will freeze completely all nuclear enrichment. The reality is that Europe is irrelevant in this conflict. " The analyst added that Europe is also deeply split on the issue, and many leaders are quietly celebrating. "Friedrich Merz told German television that Israel is doing Europe's dirty work by striking Iran. There's no doubt that Europe secretly is very happy that Iran's ballistic missile and drone production capacity appears to be significantly degraded by Israel. " Striking Iran is directly weakening Russia, which is Europe's main strategic threat. "While nobody's going to praise Netanyahu publicly in Europe, the reality is that Friedrich Merz was right. But many European governments will obviously feel differently publicly or otherwise. And that alone will prevent Europe from taking a united stance that condemns Europe to irrelevance. It's really that simple."
Euronews
2 hours ago
- Euronews
Can Iran attack the US now and how (and where) can it do it?
Iran's ambassador and permanent representative to the United Nations in Geneva Ali Bahreini told Euronews on June 19 that Tehran will attack the US if Washington 'crosses the red lines". Most military experts agree that the most probable scenario is for Iran to attack the US military bases in the region. The Iranian Revolutionary Guards already said on Sunday that the origin of the US aircraft 'has been identified and it is under surveillance', emphasizing that American bases in the region are 'not a source of strength, but a point of heightened vulnerability'. Iran's proxy in Yemen, the Houthis, also said on Saturday that they would target US ships in the Red Sea if Washington participates in any potential attack against Israel in co-operation with Israel. "We will target US ships and battleships in the Red Sea if Washington participates in the attack on Iran," the group's military spokesperson Yahya Saree said in a statement published by the group's media outlet. The US has tens of thousands of troops stationed in the Middle East, including at permanent bases in Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, Arab Gulf countries just across the Persian Gulf from Iran — and much closer than Israel. Those bases have sophisticated air defences, but would have much less warning time before waves of missiles or swarms of armed drones. It also depends a lot on the number of drones and missiles used in a possible attack. Even Israel, which is several hundred kilometers further away, has been unable to stop all of the incoming fire. Typically around 30,000 troops are based in the Middle East, and about 40,000 troops are in the region now, according to a US officials and AP. That number surged as high as 43,000 last October in response to heightened tensions between Israel and Iran as well as continuous attacks on commercial and military ships in the Red Sea by the Iranian-backed Houthis in Yemen. After June 13 when Israel first hit Iran to stop its nuclear enrichment programme, US forces in the region started taking precautionary measures, including having military dependents voluntarily leave bases, in anticipation of potential strikes and to protect personnel in case of a large-scale response from Tehran. US targets at risk amid escalating tensions US troops across the Middle East are on high alert as Iran and its proxies threaten retaliation and because US interests in the region were targeted in the past. One difference compared to past attacks and threats though is that Iran's proxies Hezbollah and Hamas' capabilities are much weaker since Israel decimated them after October 2023. Also, Iran has missiles, including ballistic, but not much of an aviation force owing to Western sanctions. Al-Asad Air Base in western Iraq, the largest U.S. deployment in the country, has been a frequent target. In 2020, after the US killed Iranian General Qasem Soleimani, Iran launched 16 missiles at American bases in Iraq; 11 hit al-Asad, wounding dozens. Attacks have continued, with drones and rockets striking the base as recently as August. In January 2024, a drone strike on Tower 22, a small US outpost in Jordan near the Syrian border, killed three American troops. The drone strike was the first deadly one against US forces since the Israel-Hamas war started in October 2023. US officials have blamed the attack on the Islamic Resistance in Iraq, a coalition of Iran-backed militias, including Kataib Hezbollah. In Bahrain, the US Navy's 5th Fleet operates with around 8,000 personnel. Qatar hosts Al-Udeid Air Base, the forward headquarters of U.S. Central Command, which can accommodate up to 10,000 troops. Camp Buehring, Ali al-Salem, and al-Dhafra are also key air bases located in Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates. US diplomatic missions in Iraq and Israel have also begun evacuating staff. Officials warn embassies could be targeted alongside military bases. US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said on X that 'protecting US forces is our top priority,' announcing the deployment of additional forces to bolster regional defenses.
