The document of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace is ponderously titled – «Towards reforming the international financial and monetary system in the context of global public authority» -  and its remarks were the most specific. The Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace calls for the advent of a new world centered on a universal political authority. The idea is not unprecedented – it was previously evoked in the 1963 encyclical Pacem in Terris of John XXIII. The document also proposed taxation measures on financial transactions (and suggested that revenues could contribute to the creation of a “world reserve fund” to support the economies of countries hit by crisis); forms of recapitalization of banks with public funds that make support conditional on “virtuous” behavior aimed at developing the real economy; more effective management of financial shadow markets that are largely uncontrolled today. Such moves would be designed to make the global economy more responsive to the needs of the person, and – the document says – less «subordinated to the interests of countries that effectively enjoy a position of economic and financial advantage».

The path to the document had been long and transparent. In May, after a media briefing with journalists to announce a conference about the Mater et Magistra, mons. Mario Toso, secretary of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, announced the journalist that another media briefing was up to come, and it would have been about a future note for the reform of the monetary system. The Vatican Secretary of State was obviously informed. There had been several sketches of the document, as usual. The first sketch was drawn down by Michel Camdessus, former president of the International Monetary Fund, consultant of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace and  part of the French delegation at the last G20 meeting. Then, document passed through several hand, bankers like Antonio Fazio – former governor of the Bank of Italy – and Ignazio Musu – economist and part of the advisory board of the Bank of Italy. The document shields itself with many citations from previous social encyclicals, and actually there is nothing so new.

In the Caritas in Veritate there is also a paragraph – the so-called «world authority paragraph» – in which it is stated that

«in the face of the unrelenting growth of global interdependence, there is a trongly felt need, even in the midst of a global recession, for a reform of the United Nations Organization, and likewise of economic institutions and international finance, so that the concept of the family of nations can acquire real teeth. One also senses the urgent need to find innovative ways of implementing the Principle of the responsibility to protect and of giving poorer nations an effective voice in shared decision-making. This seems necessary in order to arrive at a political, juridical and economic order which can increase and give direction to international cooperation for the development of all peoples in solidarity. To manage the global economy; to revive economies hit by the crisis; to avoid any deterioration of the present crisis and the greater imbalances that would result; to bring about integral and timely disarmament, food security and peace; to guarantee the protection of the environment and to regulate migration: for all this, there is urgent need of a true world political authority. . . »

Even Caritas in veritate had been sketched by many hands. An encyclical is such an important text – it is addressed to all the men of good will, and it is inspiration and part of the diplomatic work of the Holy See – that everybody would like to stress it to its own part. Among the people that glossed the Caritas in veritate,  there were economist like Stefano Zamagni and Luigino Bruni, but also the then governor of the Bank of Italy Mario Draghi and the then Italian minister of Economy Giulio Tremonti. Even Ettore Gotti Tedeschi had been involved in “glossing” the encyclical. He was still not president of the IOR (Institute for Religious Works), but he was already sure that the economical collapse came from the lack of children. No children, no creativity, no hope for the future, no economy: this simple four-words-speech-scheme is the Gotti Tedeschi’s favorite one.

After the release of the encyclical, there had been a sort of split on how to consider Caritas in veritate. Laissez-faire theorists were critical about some economical analysis, but always underlined how good was the “make more sons” line. Social economy theorists loved more the part that evoked the tunes of Populorum Progressio, the Paul VI social encyclical, in which the Pope claimed that «the new name of peace is development». The fight of interpretations was – and still is – intense. Ettore Gotti Tedeschi was invited to talk to the meeting about Caritas in veritate without either informing  the Pontifical Council Justice and Peace. And the medias were in some way divided between these two lines of the encyclical, and were totally unaware that the truth is in the middle.

The most prophetical part of the encyclical was the so-called “world authority” paragraph. In fact, this has been interpreted by many Catholics a sort of “big leviathan”. But there is a deeper reason why the Holy See has been doing this proposal. And one can find these reason looking back in history to see when this world order had been stated. The Peace of Westphalia was a series of peace treaties signed between May and October of 1648 in Osnabrück and Münster. The treaties resulted from the big diplomatic congress, thereby initiating a new system of political order in central Europe, later called Westphalian sovereignty, based upon the concept of a sovereign state governed by a sovereign. In the event, the treaties’ regulations became integral to the constitutional law of the Holy Roman Empire. It was there that the Holy See began to the fight not to be ejected from the concert of nations. It was there that the Holy See became to be subjected to the secularizing process. An increasing lack of influence that brought the Vatican State to be attacked and then defeated by national States, and to sign agreements with the States – which are the various Concordats.

Peace of Westphalia is quoted in the last document released by the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, and it is not a case. In the last years, many have talked about a New World Order. This new world order had been theorized in several think-tanks all over the world – from the Trilateral Commission to Bildeberg Group – and in the mean time finance prevailed on policy. The new world order will be an economic-based one. This seems to be the time for the change to come. So, while the Holy See was going on in signing Concordats with the national States, the world governance got always more supranational. The scenario is similar to the one of the Peace of Westphalia times. Within the Holy See, many are aware of the risk for the Church – and religions as well – to be put aside. This is the sense of the call for common rules and a world authority with universal competences.

When the document of Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace had been released, there had been a slight disagreement within the Vatican Curia. Ettore Gotti Tedeschi, president of the IOR, complained to have not been even consulted during the preparation of the document. No consulation was the fact that when one then delves into the analyses and specific proposals, it is also stunning how strong the divergence is between what is written in the document of the pontifical council for justice and peace and what has been maintained for some time in the financial commentaries published in L’Osservatore Romano by Ettore Gotti Tedeschi. For example, not even one line in the document attributes the global economic and financial crisis to the collapse in the birth rate and to the resulting higher and higher costs of population aging.

 Gotti Tedeschi did not remain silent. On November 4  L’Osservatore Romano published an editorial by him that reads like a complete repudiation of the document of the Pontifical Council for justice and Peace. Gotti Tedeschi wrote that «the true origins of the collapse of birthrates and the consequences of the increase of taxes on the GDP to absorb the costs of the ageing of the population were wrongly interpreted. The effects of the decisions made to compensate for these phenomena were underestimated, especially with the de-localization of production and consumer debt». For the president of IOR,  «to deflate the total debt – public, banking, business and family – and bring it back to pre-crisis levels, that is, to around 40% less, it is possible, though not advisable, to cancel a part of the debt with a type of “preventive agreement,” where creditors are paid at 60%».

More. Someone inside the Roman Curia – sources whisper that it was Gotti Tedeschi himself, very active indeed (he also wrote down an article for the Italian magazine Tempi) – complained about the document with the cardinal Bertone, secretary of State. Medias report that Bertone complained to have not been even informed by document. It was not true, since he had been constantly kept informed of the document. And this is what he said, sources from inside the Curia report. Probably, the truth is in the middle: pressed by the vain discontents memeber of the Curia that were protesting, Bertone said that he knew about the document, not about his contents, and he managed a summit to solve the question. The news about a summit convened in the Secretariat of State on November, 4^th leaked to the press. The conclusion of the summit was that this binding order would be transmitted to all of the offices of the curia: from that point on, nothing in writing would be released unless it had been inspected and authorized by the Secretariat of State.

This is how the red alarm for the new document of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace has been defused. In the mean time, very few know about the international activities of the Holy See, and the financial transparency brought on with the establishment of the Authority for Financial Information can have some contraindication. The game is on the international impact of the Holy See. The same game the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace played by asking for an World Authority with Universal Competences. Since the world is now globally ruled, the Holy See want to give is contribution to write common rules. In order these common rules will be for the common good of humanity, and not just for the good of few. Will this commitment be consumed in the bonfire of vanities?

In fact, there are still several steps to do. The Authority for Financial Information was created as the Vatican issued new laws to fight money laundering and terrorist financing in a major effort to comply with EU norms and shed its image as a tax haven mired in secrecy and scandal. The Vatican had pledged to pass such legislation by when it entered into a monetary agreement with the EU in December 2009. It is commonly thought that the effort went into high gear following the money laundering probe at the Vatican bank, which greatly embarrassed the Vatican and its bank chairman, economist Ettore Gotti Tedeschi. Actually, the steps were already ready to be done. But, after the laundering probe, everything has been presented – even by media – as part of the Gotti Tedeschi’s effort for transparency, and this annoyed the former president of the Ior, Angelo Caloia.

Cardinal Attilio Nicora had been nominated president of the Authority for Financial Information.  For a few months, Nicora also remained president of the Administration of the Patrimony of the Apostolic See, a sort of Vatican Central Bank. But there had been questions about possible conflicts of interests, given Nicora’s dual roles.  In May, a Dutch liberal member of the European Parliament, Sophie in ‘t Veld, formally asked the European Commission to look into whether the Vatican’s financial authority can be truly independent given Nicora’s jobs and whether there wasn’t a conflict of interest. So, Nicora asked to be relieved of his administration job to focus exclusively on the financial authority, and Pope Benedict XVI agreed.

In fact, Nicora’s job is not that easy. Inside the Authority of Finacial Information, there are two different points of view on how to procede to be enrolled in the ‘white list’. The first one is carried out by Ettore Gotti Tedeschi, president of the Ior (Institute for Religious Works) and his ‘disciples’. Marcello Condemi was the attorney who wrote great part of the new legislation for the prevention and countering of illegal activities in the financial and monetary sectors. Francesco De Pasquale, lawyer, has been appointed director of the Authority for Financial Information. They had both been backed by Ettore Gotti Tedeschi, and they share with the president of the Ior the aim to show the Holy See the most transparent they can. Even if the Authority for Financial Information is to control the Ior itself. Even if the Prefecture for Economic affairs – soon there will be a new prefect – has itself the charge to monitor Vatican’s financial movements.

On September 30, Gotti Tedeschi agreed to be questioned by the magistrates of Rome, like any Italian person of interest. His deposition filled 91 pages of transcripts, portions of which were leaked to the press. Gotti Tedeschi explained his action as «a demonstration of the desire to comply with a new era».

This new era was not free from complaints within he Vatican walls.  In 1993, when he was called for questioning by the magistrature of Milan, the president of the IOR at the time, Angelo Caloia, got the magistrates to submit a request internationally, with the request forwarded through diplomatic channels to the Holy See as a foreign state. In 2010, many within the Vatican would have reacted in the same way, but Gotti Tedeschi’s line prevailed.

Holy See is a State with its own sovereignty. Every single country can use its money at his personal discretion. If a country wants – through diplomatic channels – secretly finance any sort of organism or association, no one has the right to control the money they transfer. The same can do Holy See. One of the strong points of the accusation on Wojtyla beatification was brought on the basis of the money Wojtyla and his entourage would eventually send to Solidarnosc. A Vatican official – who wants to remain anonymous – explains that «this is part of the mission of the Church. The Church is free to use its money in the way is believed more proper, in order to help the populations to set free from the oppression or to help Christian communities wherever in the world».

The risk for the Holy See is to renounce to part of its sovereignty to respond to GAFI’s requests in order to enter in the White List. Holy See commitment has – until now – been higher than the one of any other State. When the Holy See will be enrolled in the White Lists – the Vatican official says –  it will commit itself to make its peculiar moral impact weigh on the World financial organisms. On the other hand, it has to watch out for not being considered on a par of a Ngo Organization, with the duty to give the complete accountability of their sources of money and the way they use their money.

The request for transparency seems to be the subtle part of the campaign to eject the Holy See from the concert of nations.  Since April 6, 1964, the Holy See has been a permanent observer state at the United Nations. In that capacity, the Holy See has since had a standing invitation to attend all the sessions of the General Assembly, the United Nations Security Council and the United Nations Economic and Social Council. As a matter of diplomatic courtesy,  the Holy See was also allowed to make formal policy statements in the General Assembly, and it was invited to observe all open meetings of the intergovernmental subsidiary bodies of the General Assembly.

From 1999, the non-governmental organization, Catholics for Choice, lobbied against the participation of the Holy See in the United Nations, arguing that the Holy See is a religious organization and not a state, and that, therefore, it should not have the right to participate, in a position analogous to that of states, in the intergovernmental decision-making process on social, cultural and economic matters. No State supported this initiative. On the contrary, the United Nations General Assembly confirmed further its observer status within the UN, through its Resolution 58/314 of 16 July 2004. Through that resolution, all Member States of the United Nations decided to confirm to the Holy See its status as a Permanent Observer State of the United Nations and to grant it all the rights of full membership except the rights to vote and to present candidates.

Currently, the Holy See has the right to participate in the general debate of the General Assembly and to intervene in the discussion of any issue inscribed in the agenda of that assembly. It has the right to participate in all meetings open to all Member States, the right to make points of order and to exercise the right of reply, the right to circulate proposals and position papers as official documents, and the right to co-sponsor draft resolutions and decisions. Commenting on that resolution, Archbishop Celestino Migliore, the then Holy See Permanent Observer to the United Nations, said: «We have no vote because this is our choice». He added that the Holy See considers that its current status «is a fundamental step that does not close any path for the future. The Holy See has the requirements defined by the UN statute to be a member state and, if in the future it wished to be so, this resolution would not impede it from requesting it».

When the Permanent Observer of the Holy See speaks in the General Assembly, everybody is silent. The statements of the Holy See are took in great consideration. Its international status is prestigious. The Holy See took advantage of the prerogatives of its observer status to incorporate Christian values within the decisions and recommendations of the United Nations. Notable were its successful efforts, in cooperation with like-minded countries, to ensure the adoption of a Nations Declaration banning all forms of Human Cloning and to prevent the adoption of a proposed resolution on sexual orientation and gender identity.

Now, the Holy See’s international prestige is trying to be undermined. And the request for transparence can be – for many inside the Vatican – the first step to make of the Holy See an organization on a par of a Ngo. Was not this the Economist asked in 2007?