The release of the resolution is a milestone:. The era of charismatic and polarizing personalities has come to an end. A new era has taken its place. The era of a solid and clean Church. This is what the Pope wanted. One must not fool around with the institutions. One must serve the institutions. Joseph Ratzinger always followed this dictate, from the time he served as one of the expert theologians at the Second Vatican Council. Now, he is steering the Church in that direction.

There had been several signals that the charismatic personalities era had come to end. For example, the appointment of Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone as Vatican Secretary of State. Bertone – a non-diplomat canonist – said from the very beginning that he aimed to be a «secretary of the Church» more than «a Secretary of State». And then, the replacement of Joaquin Navarro-Valls, director of the Holy See Press Office, better known as the «Pope’s spokesman», with Fr. Federico Lombardi, sj: Navarro-Valls allowed his job to be focused on himself as much as Lombardi has done the exact opposite.. Another “big” signal had been the appointment of cardinal Dias as prefect of the Congregation for the Evangelization of People. Dias’ low key style stands in contrast to that of his predecessor, Cardinal Sepe, who sought the spotlight constantly in the Osservatore Romano – the Holy See newspaper – and wherever he could get it.

Since the beginning of his Pontificate, Benedict XVI set forth several critiques against careerism. His speeches on these topics can be considered part of a long catechesis: on the one hand, the Pope explains the logic of serving the Church; on the other, time after time, Benedict XVI went on challenging and changing the Curial mindset. Less diplomacy, more gospel. Less diplomacy, more law – both Canon and international law. Because institutions are based on the law. And reflection is rooted in truth. Truth and law can be considered the pillars of Benedict XVI’s Pontificate.

There have been different interpretations of the loss of confidence in Gotti Tedeschi. Many observers –particularly the Italians– maintain that Mr. Gotti Tedeschi fell on the wrong side of the internal debate about Vatican Financial transparency. The Holy See recently amended law n. 127 for countering money laundering and the financing of terrorism, and Mr. Gotti Tedeschi had been one of the opponents of this reform. Law n. 127 calls on all the agencies to attain financial transparency. Under the former law, transparency was solely the purview of the Authority for Financial Information. With the new law, everything reverts to the Vatican Secretary of State, while making all the institutions that are under his umbrella accountable. The institutions have an incentive to respond positively, as a means to assert themselves.

This is what the IOR’s board did, when it decided to release the two- page harsh resolution on the loss of confidence in Mr.  Gotti Tedeschi. Any innuendo is swept away by the resolution. Before, the Holy See would whisper, and everybody tried to interpret the whispers. Now, Holy See sheds a spotlight on how things really went. And there is not much to add after that.

«Each of us – Carl A. Anderson, Supreme Knight of Columbus Knights, member of IOR’s board and secretary of the meeting where the decision to remove Mr. Tedeschi was taken, said – has a solid reputation, but it is difficult to project an image of transparency if there is no real transparency behind it. Gotti was not committed to the Institute, he was not focused on his job, he was not properly informed about the activities of the institution and often he did not attend meetings. We had to make a decision, and we voted to withdraw our confidence in him. We had no choice.. The image of the Institute had suffered.. Our objective is to promote transparency and to revamp the Institute’s work, something that Gotti always talked about, but never did».

There are nine stated reasons for the Board’s decision: failure to carry out basic duties incumbent upon the President; failure to remain informed of the activities of the Institute and to keep the Board informed; leaving and failing to attend meetings of the Board; lack of prudence in making comments about the Institute; failure to provide any formal explanation for the distribution of documents held by the President; dissemination of inaccurate information regarding the Institute; failure to counter  flawed media reports about the Institute; polarizing the Institute and alienating personnel; increasingly erratic personal behavior. Two of these stated reasons call into question Gotti Tedeschi reliability, in particular the one about the the distribution of documents that only he held. And so Mr. Gotti Tedeschi goes out of the scene, after only two years as president of the Board of Superintendance of the IOR.

The idea of expelling the Holy See from the concert of nations is not new.  Since 1995, “Catholics for a Free Choice” has tried to do this through petitions signed by various countries. The American group is led by a former religious sister, Frances Kissling – who has been officially excommunicated by the bishops of the United States. The campaign was called «See Change».  and it was aimed at expelling the Holy See from the United Nations.
Because – they said – the Catholic Church is the only religion in the world that sits at the UN as a permanent observer, with “privileges” similar to those of sovereign nations.

In the bureaucracies of the UN and of the other major international organization that is the European Union, in which the Holy See has the rank of observer, the desire to expel it is fairly widespread, and sometimes it comes to light. The reasons in support of this expelling Holy See from the concert of nations seems to be paradoxical. If the Church strives to bring peace in the world, that’s unobjectionable, but when it opposes abortion and euthanasia, no.  «It is not right – said they who protest against the Holy See international status – that in order to support its own interests it should make use of an international juridical status that doesn’t truly belong to it». Even if the Church claims for religious freedom, world governments don’t seem to appreciate it.

The last Benedict XVI’s message for the World Day of Peace was precisely about religious freedom. Nowadays,  religious freedom is a crucial challenge, and this was even more evident by analyzing the international reactions to the Message. The Pope underlined that «the same determination that condemns every form of fanaticism and religious fundamentalism must also oppose every form of hostility to religion that would restrict the public role of believers in civil and political life». Benedict XVI so outlined two risks for religious freedoms: the attacks coming from fundamentalism and the attacks coming from the secularism. No-one of the world governments underlined the attack coming from the secularism, but every-one declared to be on the Pope’s side in defending religious freedom from fundamentalisms. All right, but what about secularism? As Benedict XVI stated in the traditional speech held at the beginning of the year to the Ambassadors accredited to the Holy See, there are «Countries which accord great importance to pluralism and tolerance, but where religion is increasingly being marginalized. There is a tendency to consider religion, all religion, as something insignificant, alien or even destabilizing to modern society, and to attempt by different means to prevent it from having any influence on the life of society». The Pope also condemned the fact that «Christians are even required at times to act in the exercise of their profession with no reference to their religious and moral convictions, and even in opposition to them, as for example where laws are enforced limiting the right to conscientious objection on the part of health care or legal professionals».

These words remained unheard. While – on the other hand – governments’ foreign offices claim themselves as promoters of religious freedom. Recently, Mr. Franco Frattini, Foreign Affairs minister of Italy, met card. Tarcisio Bertone, Vatican Secretary of State. They officialy talked about “Arab spring” and European Union issues. But it also was the occasion for Mr. Frattini to underline Italian efforts in favor of religious freedom. Mr. Frattini  has certainly remembered the efforts of Italy to keep the crucifix exposed in Italian classrooms and his personal battle against the absence of the Christmas holidays in the calendar of the European Parliament. Anyway, when the aim to eject the Holy See from the concert of nations comes down to action, it never succeeds. In July of 2004, the UN general assembly approved a resolution that not only confirmed, but even reinforced the Holy See’s presence in the organization. The Holy See has been at the UN since April 6, 1964 with «permanent observer status».

Since the Holy See’s ejection is far away to come, there is a more subtle strategy, in order to undermine the moral power of the Church and of religions in general. It is brought on by considering religious freedom as one of the freedom of expressions, or by considering religions no more than a tradition. One example – according to many observers – is precisely the crucifix verdict. According to this verdict, crucifix is just a tradition and the Great Chamber does not pronounce about the traditions of the countries. So, the problem is only postponed to when the tradition will change.

Another strategy is to weaken the Social Doctrine of the Church. The Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church is very fair: the Church has an evangelical vocation to take care of social issues. This social-evangelical vocation has an even important meaning nowadays. Fifty years ago, Pope John XXIII defined the world imbalances in the encyclical Mater et Magistra. Now, these imbalances need to be updated with new ones, as an international congress pointed out. But in Ubicumque et semper – the Motu Proprio which promulgates the new Vatican Pontifical Council for the Promotion of the New Evangelization – the Social Doctrine of the Church is never mentioned.

On the other hand, some of the Justice and Peace Commissions in the world are thinking to change their name from Justice and Peace to Caritas in Veritate. Caritas in Veritate is an encyclical considered by many Vatican insiders a “little miracle”, since many put their hands on the text. Ettore Gotti Tedeschi – now president of the I.O.R. (Institute for Religious Works), Giulio Tremonti – minister of Economy and accredited by many as the next Italian premier, Mario Draghi – governor of Bank of Italy and now running for the presidency of European Central Bank, had the opportunity to make their observations to the text of the encyclical. And the Italian bank world took possession of the topics of the encyclical taking part to a Congress about Caritas in veritate and organized by the Pontifical Council for Laity. No member of Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace – who had in charge the writing of the encyclical – had been invited.

Even Vatican diplomacy can be undermined. Rumors from diplomatic environments said that there is the intention to let some lay take important charges in Vatican Diplomatic Corps. Pontifical Legates must be priests, because they represent the Pope. This rule is valid only for Papal nuncios. Papal nuncios are the Pope’s ambassador, but at the same time they work as bishops. They weigh up candidates for episcopate in the countries in which they are nuncios, they speak to Episcopal conferences, and  they  also have relationships with governments. On the other hand, nuncios who are appointed as permanent observer (at United Nations, Unesco, Fao, European Parliament) just have in charge to maintain relationships among Holy See and States. Appointing lay people as permanent observers would not be out of Canonical Law. Would this  be a defeat for the Holy See diplomatic tradition?

Then, Benedict XVI refers to his beloved predecessor. Wojtyla was not ashamed to proclaim himself son of God. He was not ashamed to announce the Gospel. Karol Wojytla’s holiness is truly all compelled in his being for God without being ashamed. “When I first meet somebody, I pray for him”, Karol Wojtyla said. He chose to be a priest because – after the death of his mother, brother and father – God is his family. He wear priestly cloths in a country (the Poland under communist rule) where only being priest is seen as suspicious. When he becomes Pope, he has no fear to proclaim the Gospel, notwithstanding a Pontificate is full of difficulties and controversial facts.

Many read, in Benedict XVI’s words, a sort of auto-absolution for the pedophilia scandal. But pedophilia of the clergy (and – in a wider perspective – the phenomenon of clerical abuses) is rooted more in-depth, according to the Pope. The problem is that the Christians are not a people of God anymore. Benedict XVI explained his point of view in a letter sent to the Church of Ireland  after the scandal of Irish Church reached Rome. In that letter, he asked to Irish and world Church to begin an auto-purification path. Wojtyla’s call upon cannot be considered an auto-absolution. It is something different. Wojtyla is indicated as an example of how being a person of God. Wojtyla’s holiness indicates the path to be Church again.

The debate for the 1st of May beatification never appeased. Many pointed the finger at the controversial issues of Wojtyla’s papacy: the I.O.R. scandal in the beginning of the 80s, the pedophilia of the clergy cover-up, Legionaries of Christ’s founder Marcial Maciel scandal, and so on. Many ride the wave of the Ratzinger icon opposed to his predecessor one. There are several common sentences: Ratzinger cleans up what became dirty under Wojtyla’s pontificate; Wojtyla was not very fond of managing the Church, Ratzinger is doing it. Ratzinger is a “Pope less brought to the media”, while Wojtyla was a Pope at ease on the stage of the world.

Common sentences, and nothing more. The spiritual link between the two Popes was more than strong. Rome, 1976. Cardinal Karol Wojtyla is called to preach Lent Spiritual Exercises to Roman Curia. The topic of his preaching is: «Christ, sign of contradiction». It is a sign of contradiction in the Eastern Europe, where atheism aroused to be a political system. It is a sign of contradiction in the Western civilization, where people always more do without God, and are disinterested to the Church and the moral of the Church. Christ is also sign of contradiction inside the Church. Karol ask everybody to see inside their hearts. He asks it to the prelate of the Curia as well as to powerful man, magnates. Reading his words, one cannot be stricken by the fact that, at a certain point, Wojtyla quotes “Introduction to Christianity”, by Joseph Ratzinger.

Ratzinger never abandoned the topic of Christ sign of contradiction. He made of it the pivot of his pontificate. He is in perfect continuity with his beloved predecessor. Several times, on the other hand, Wojtyla called him “the faithful friend”. They lived in symbiosis. Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, now Secretary of State but formerly secretary of Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, discredits – in a book he just published to celebrate John Paul II Beatification, Un cuore grande (Libreria Editrice Vaticana) – the *black legend* about a conservative Joseph Ratzinger who wrote Dominus Jesus, the declaration on the unicitiy and salvific universality of Jesus Christ and the Church. Wojtyla himself wanted this declaration to be written – Bertone explained – in order to create no confusion among religion and no danger of religious syncretism. It’s the same line followed by Benedict XVI. That’s why the next meeting among religions for peace in Assisi is organized by Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Congregation for the Divine Cult and the Secretary of State.

Going on opposing John Paul II and Benedict XVI seems stupid. The top of the Church always changes, and new Popes will be elected. But everything is in the middle – the grey eminences – never change. Grey eminences move their pieces to one or to the other part to make their own game. Did the things really change? Actually, while time passes by, things simply are managed in a different way, and that’s the only visible change. Former centers of power need to stay apart, and act in the shadows. When a new Pope is elected, grey eminences need to decide if going in favor or against the new top. The Pope is always left alone in managing the Church, and is subjected to blackmail.

Just think about what happened in Regensburg in 2007. Benedict XVI’s speech on Islam was checked and not controlled from a Secretary of State made up of a brand new top (Cardinal Bertone) and of the rest of the office still faithful to the previous Secretary, cardinal Angelo Sodano. Nobody took care of the diplomatic repercussion. The speech aroused bitter controversy in the Islamic world. But the controversy brought to a letter by 138 Muslim personalities to the Pope. It was the first time in the Islamic world that such a diverse group of people was speaking with a single voice, and expounding the principles of Islam to the head of the most important Christian Church, with the intention of arriving at “mutual understanding.”

In September 2009, Il Giornale, an Italian newspaper owned by Berlusconi’s family, attacked Dino Boffo, director of Avvenire, the newspaper of the Italian Episcopal Conference, guilty of criticizing the moral behavior of the President of Council while being sentenced for harassment in the past. The source of the newspaper was a tissue came from a “person you should institutionally trust”, said Vittorio Feltri, at that time director of Il Giornale. It was the same tissue that for years passed from hand to hand at Istituto Toniolo, the “strongbox” of Catholic university – who raises great part of the funding for Catholic culture in Italy – since Dino Boffo had been nominated in its board.  It was the typical issue the Secretary of State hand for its internal dossiers. Many interpreted it as a signal, since Sodano was losing influence inside the I.O.R., the Vatican Bank, since the man he nominated as a prelate, mons. Piero Pioppo, was appointed nuncio to Cameroon and a new president had been nominated, Ettore Gotti Tedeschi.

Now, cardinal Sodano is presenting himself as the best ally of Joseph Ratzinger. As dean of the College of Cardinals, in the spite of the priestly pedophilia scandal the last year, during the Easter Mass, pronounced a speech in which defended Benedict XVI doings from what he called «idle chatter».

Right before the beatification, many Italian medias wrote about a letter by cardinal Sodano, in which he explained his decision not to testify for Wojtyla’s beatification. The same choice had been done from Cardinal Sandri, a faithful companion to cardinal Sodano. A few days before the beatification, it was asked to cardinal Angelo Amato, prefect of the Congregation for the Cause of the Saints, the reasons of this choice. He replied that the Positio contains the testimony of both the cardinals. Why are there these two differing reports?

This is just an example, one of the hidden signs of continuity between John Paul II and Benedict XVI pontificates. Many tell that several grey eminences (cardinals, bishops and so on) still meets – almost once a month – with their faithful companions. They still manage the power. But the lot of guiding the Church fell to Benedict XVI.

Every year, the 18th of February, a ceremony is given in the Italian Embassy to the Holy See to commemorate the agreements between Italy and Holy See (Patti Lateranensi, 11^th of February 1929; and the revision of Patti Lateranensi, 18^th of February 1984). The protocol of the ceremony is very strict. First step, a meeting between Italian delegation (Prime Minister, his subsecretary and the Minister for Foreign Affairs) and Vatican delegation (the Secretary of State, his substitute and the Secretary for the Relations with the States). Second step, Italian delegation enriches with the President of Republic and the presidents of Chamber of Deputies and Senate, and Vatican one with the President of the Italian Episcopal Conference. Last step, the ceremony itself, with various members of the Church and the Italian Parliament.

The attention is focused on the possible meeting between the cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, Secretary of State, and Mr. Silvio Berlusconi, Italian Prime Minister. Mr. Berlusconi is involved in a sex-scandal and a judge ordered Italian Prime Minister to stand trial on charges of paying for sex with an underage girl and for abuse of office.

Will cardinal Bertone be embarrassed for the scandal? Or the relationships will be kind and interested as usual?

Diplomatic relationship, indeed, cannot be touched from political contingencies. Neverthless the «moral question», Holy See will look forward. There are several things to talk about with Italian government. And the Secretary of Benedict XVI, mons. Georg Gaenswein – in a lectio magistralis at University for Foreigners of Perugia – seemed to let understand that it is now the time for another revision of the Agreement between Italy and Holy See.

I write about it in this article on Il Tempo (in Italian)

Incontro Cav-Bertone

Insieme celebrano i Patti Lateranensi. Vaticano: rapporti cordiali con il premier. La Chiesa attenta alla legge sul biotestamento.

Berlusconi e Bertone si incontrano. Non da soli, e non privatamente. Il presidente del Consiglio e il Segretario di Stato Vaticano avranno modo di incontrarsi oggi all’ambasciata presso la Santa Sede, alle consuete celebrazioni dei Patti Lateranensi del 1929 e dell’accordo di revisione del Concordato del 1984. Un incontro istituzionale, scandito dal protocollo: prima una bilaterale tra le due delegazioni (Berlusconi, Letta e Frattini per l’Italia, Bertone, il sostituto Filoni e Dominique Mamberti, segretario dei Rapporti con gli Stati Esteri per il Vaticano); quindi un incontro più allargato, in cui intervengono le prime tre cariche dello Stato (il presidente Napolitano e i presidenti di Camera e Senato, Fini e Schifani) e Angelo Bagnasco, presidente della Conferenza episcopale italiana, insieme con altri ministri, e presidenti dei gruppi parlamentari, infine, la cerimonia vera e propria, cui partecipa un nutrito gruppo di invitati, tra parlamentari e membri del mondo ecclesiale. Oltretevere specificano che non ci saranno incontri. Che nessun faccia a faccia tra Bertone e Berlusconi è previsto. Ma è semplice protocollo. Certo, ci sarà occasione di parlare a quattrocchi durante la cerimonia vera e propria. Incontri perlopiù informali, non ufficiali. «Si tratta comunque – afferma un funzionario vaticano – di un gesto necessitato e non voluto».

Sarà un momento per discutere in modo equilibrato circa il rapporto intergovernativo. Le relazioni tra Italia e Santa Sede fanno parte delle normali relazioni istituzionali che intercorrono tra due Stati. Relazioni istituzionali che prescindono dalla cronaca politica, e guardano piuttosto a prospettive più larghe. «In fondo – ragionano sempre da Oltretevere – se il cardinal Gasparri si fosse lasciato trascinare da quella che era la realtà italiana dell’epoca, non ci sarebbe mai stato un Concordato nel 1929. Ed è bene ricordare che gli accordi si fanno soprattutto con le persone di cui non ci si fida». Insomma, se imbarazzo c’è per il caso Ruby e il rinvio a giudizio del presidente del Consiglio, non riguarda comunque i rapporti istituzionali.

La volontà è quella di fare il punto della situazione, come si fa ad un compleanno, quando si guarda indietro a ciò che è stato fatto e ciò che ancora c’è da fare. E i temi sul tavolo sono moltissimi: la legge sul fine vita (presto in discussione in Parlamento), i sovvenzionamenti per le scuole paritarie, il quoziente familiare. Addirittura – ma è solo un rumor – l’ipotesi di una nuova revisione del Concordato, accreditata anche dalla Lectio Magistralis che monsignor Georg Gaenswein, segretario personale del Papa, ha tenuto martedì all’Università per Stranieri di Perugia, che gli ha conferito una laurea honoris causa. Gaenswein ha spiegato di aver «solo messo in fila le possibilità». Ma si tratta senza dubbio di un testo meditato, che lancia un segnale preciso. Su questi temi si gioca il rapporto tra Italia e Santa Sede. Che va oltre la contingenza politica.

© Il Tempo – 18.02.2011