It was basing on this same worry that the Pope made of ecumenism one of the main Pontificate’s leit-motivs. His experience of almost thirty years of guidance of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the continuous divisions he had to face brought him to a reflection. That is that the divide among Christians is a scandal, as he repeatedly said. And that reaching for the unity of Christians, operating for the reconciliations among the several Christians groups – may they be traditionalists, protestants, evangelical -  is part of the program he outlined in his first Pontifical Mass. The program of not having a legislative program, but of following the will of God.

Unreal criticism on Papal ecumenism

«To work tirelessly to rebuild the full and visible unity of all Christ’s followers». This is the «impelling duty» of the successor of Peter. Already in the first Message after his election to the Papal Throne, Pope Benedict XVI spoke these programmatic words. The cause of ecumenism has always been central in this pontificate. Benedict XVI often referred to the necessary «purification of the memory» and see «inner conversion» as the indispensable premise for progress on the ecumenical journey. And he always exercised ecumenical primacy in his many meetings with  representatives of other Churches and Christian communities.

The ecumenism of Benedict XVI is not one of negotiation, of reciprocal concessions of sovereignty, of the watering down of doctrine, for the sake of creating a structure acceptable to all. It is simply meant to revive fidelity to the roots of the mission of Christians in the world, as intended by Jesus Christ. It is meant to create unity on the basis of this fidelity.

Already as a theologian and a cardinal, Joseph Ratzinger worked very hard to ensure that the ecumenical dialogue made headway and enriched it with useful theological reflections. His ecumenical action is expressed more clearly and deeply in his interpretation of the priestly prayer of Jesus, that all may be one, of which the Pope speaks in part two of his book on Jesus of Nazareth.

Anglicans

Among the many criticisms aimed at Benedict XVI, the one of ditching ecumenism no longer holds up, especially after his celebration of Vespers together with the archbishop of Canterbury and primate of the Anglican Communion, Rowan Williams, on the evening of March 10 in the Roman monastery of San Gregorio al Celio.

With the Anglican Communion, the rapprochement that has been seen since Joseph Ratzinger became Pope is in some ways incredible. In the autumn of 2009, Benedict XVI promulgated an apostolic constitution, Anglicanorum Cœtibus to normalize the entrance into the Catholic Church of entire communities of faithful coming from Anglicanism, with their bishops and priests.

Some progressive Catholic currents condemned the initiative as a gravely anti-ecumenical act: that is, as a restoration of the ideology of the «great return» and as the intention of the Catholic Church to «expand its empire» by ripping away portions of rival Churches. But in the Anglican camp, the initiative did not provoke too much rejection.

The announcement of Anglicanorum Cœtibus was made simultaneously from Rome and London, here through the initiative of Anglican primate Williams himself, although he had not been part of the preparation of the document.

This was followed by the entry into the Church of Rome of thousands of faithful and dozens of priests and bishops, accommodated in special “ordinariates”, two of them so far, the first in Great Britain and the second in the United States.

Lefevbrists

Benedict XVI made of his pontificate a pontificate of unity, trying to repair the divides within the Church. One example: the Priest Fraternity of Saint Pius X’s case. Even the criticism aimed at the Pope of putting the embrace with the Lefebvrists in front of dialogue with the other Christian confessions can no more hold up.  Even because the facts say the opposite. The Catholic traditionalist Lefebvre founded the SSPX in 1969 in answer to the reforms pushed through by the Second Vatican Council. The group has grown to include tens of thousands of followers and hundreds of priests — a «painful wound in the body of the church» Benedict XVI  said.

Ratzinger took care of Marcel Lefevbre and his followers since the 80s. In 1988, it seemed that the solution was up to come. After a cardinal Edouard Gagnon’s visit to Ecône  - where the headquarter of SSPX is – on April, 8th 1988, in a letter addressed to the then cardinal Ratzinger designed a proposal to let the SSPX get a regular collocation in the Church. This proposal dealt with an agreement – to be signed in May 1988 – about the Liturgical Books approved in 1962 and with the constitution of SSPX in «Society of Apostolic Life». In exchange. Marcel Lefevbre assured his obedience to the Pope and his acceptance of Second Vatican Council, thus acknowledging the validity of the new rites of the Mass.

The breach anyway occurred. Lefevbre was not authorized for an episcopal ordination – he wanted to ordain a new bishop that was intended to be his successor in SSPX (and this one was Fellay, that is now effectively the leader of SSPX) – and so he backtracked and decided to ordain four bishops without the permission of Rome. The ordination had been fixed for June, 29th 1988. To prevent the illicit ordination, in June, 24 1988 John Paul II gave his permission for the ordination. It was not sufficient. The 15th of August, Lefevbre wrote in a letter that he did not need just one, but three bishops. The breach was unavoidable.

From then on, an important debate took place, until the revoke of the excommunication to bishops ordained without the Papal permission. It was since June 2008 that Lefevbrist asked for the revoke of the excommunication. Lefevbrist said in exchange that they would respond to the proposals of Benedict XVI to bring the SSPX into a new communion with Rome. In 2007, Pope also gave the opportunity to celebrate the Holy Mass according to the rite of 1962. And now that we reached 2012, the Pope made SSPX an offer they could not refuse: a personal prelature, with the agreement that they would accept the Second Vatican Council and the Papal authority. The answer did not come, and all the SSPX statements have been interlocutory and nothing let think about a rapprochment.

All the efforts have been done. Yet, the internal divisions inside the same Fraternity and the waywardness for claiming to always be on the right track incredibly brought to keep the breach, nevertheless the Papal efforts.

Schuelerkreis

«The ambition for the unity of Christians is in the first place a spiritual reality, and this is the reason why its heart is the spiritual ecumenism». It was 2009, and Walter Kasper was still president of the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of the Unity of Christians. «Spiritual ecumenism» had long become is watchword. More than looking at the documents and at the big ecumenical meetings, Kasper had come to look at what was built from the bottom up: he looked at the ecumenical networks born from communities and ecclesial movements, and it compared it to a sort of «back to the origins» ecumenism. In fact, originally ecumenism was brought on by small groups of dialogue, prayer and biblical studies. «Next to (the increasingly difficult) official dialogue, new promising forms of dialogue are arising», Kasper said.

That also Benedict XVI thinks that ecumenism must come from the prayer was immediately acknowledged in Koln. The Pope went to Koln in 2005 – it was his first Papal trip – for the World Youth Day. In his August 19 address to the representatives of the Protestant and Orthodox Churches, the Pope on number of occasion raised his eyes from the text and improvised, adding the words to the official text. In one of these «off the cuff» passages, the Pope maintained that  «now, it is said that following the clarification regarding the doctrine of justification, the elaboration of ecclesiological issues and the questions concerning ministry are the main obstacles still to be overcome. In short, this is true, but I must also say that I dislike this terminology, which from a certain point of view delimits the problem since it seems that we must now debate about institutions instead of the Word of God, as though we had to place our institutions in the centre and fight for them. I think that in this way the ecclesiological issue as well as that of the “ministerium” are not dealt with correctly. The real question is the presence of the Word in the world».

Benedict XVI reprised these issues in his last trip to Germany, in September 2011. In Erfurt – where Martin Luther studied as a Catholic and decided to be an Augustinian monk – many awaited an “ecumenical gift”, and many auspicated that this gift was the revoke of the Luther’s excommunication. The Pope responded to these expectations by explaining that the idea itself of the “ecumenical gifts” is part of a wrong idea of Church, because – the Pope said – «this is a political misunderstanding of faith and ecumenism». «The faith of Christians does not rest on such a weighing of benefits and drawbacks. A self-made faith is worthless. Faith is not something we work out intellectually and negotiate between us. It is the foundation for our lives. Unity grows not by the weighing of benefits and drawbacks but only by entering ever more deeply into the faith in our thoughts and in our lives». In the end, the gift Benedict XVI carried at Erfurt was that of living the Martin Luther’s most intense question:  «How do I receive the grace of God?» And he remembered that Catholics and Lutherans are less divided that what they think, that the «confessional» era has come to an end, that Christians must know how to be missionaries, that no one must ever forget that there is evil, since minimizing the evil «is not a foolishness»: it unavoidably brings man to the loss of himself and of his life.

Basing on prayer, Catholics and Lutherans seem to be closest than what they appear. As close as the 80 stairs that divide the Cathedral from the Saint Severe Church in Erfurt. In Germany, ecumenism is a topical issue. No surprise that just one of this year Schuelerkreis’ rapporteur does not come from Germany.

The teachers of Professor Ratzinger

Let’s give a glance to the teacher of ecumenism of professor Ratzinger. The «hidden» rapporteur of the 3 days meeting had obviously been card. Walter Kasper. At the beginning of 2007, Walter Kasper – then president of the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of the Unity of Christians – projected with the officials of the Vatican dicastery he leaded to collect and present the results of the official dialogue with the Catholic Church and the historical protestant Churches: Lutherans and Reformed, Anglicans and Methodist. This collection was aimed to show to a new generation the fruits of 40 years of dialogue, comparing what had been realized. The project brought to the drafting of the book Harvesting the fruits. Basic aspects of Christian faith in ecumenical dialogue.. This book was the reference book for the Schuelerkreis. The book provided a scenario of the past, in order to acknowledge the great achievements of the ecumenical dialogue so that the new generation of ecumenist will not start from scratch. On the other hand, the book also provided a scenario of the future: true, «exhaustion and disillusionments» spread, and the post-Council enthusiasms seem to be far way; but it is also true that many things changed. Kasper wrote: «Sometimes partners are not the same anymore, and are very diverse by the one we met during and after the Second Vatican Council. There are internal breaches, new issues in the ethic, problems that were unknown in the past. There had been changes in the Catholic Church, as well, and sometimes our documents are difficultly acceptable for our partners».

Theodor Dieter – since 1997 president of the Institute for Ecumenical Research in Strasbourg – talked about the relationship among the ecumenical partners. «I became strictly speaking an ecumenist – he recounts – when I was called to teach to the Institute for Ecumenical Research». In fact, he thread a long path to get there: educated as a strong Lutheran, Dieter always searched for a new way to tell theology, and he found his way reading the fathers of the Church and medieval theologians. Joseph Ratzinger thread a similar path on Catholic perspective, and this lead him to develop a dialogical methodology.

In ecumenism, the studies on the New Testament are basical. In his book Jesus of Nazareth. From the entrance in Jerusalem to the Resurrection, Benedict XVI often quoted the protestant bishop Ulrich Wilckens, whose Theology of the New Testament was a «reference book» for the Papal work. Wilckens presented to Schuelerkreis his studies on the New Testament, that are of great importance for the ecumenical dialogue.

Charles Morerod championed for years ecumenical dialogue. Now, Morerod, Dominican, is bishop of Lausanne, Geneve and Freiburg. In the past, he was part of several ecumenical tables. In an interview to 30 Giorni, Morerod explained that the problem of the Papal infallibility – topical for the Orthodox Church – comes from the fact that «faith is never the result of a poll with a prevailing majority», and that «fair and understandable statements on this issue have been written in the document for the gift of the authority, drafted from the Commission for the Dialogue among Catholics and Anglican» in 1998. That document states that «any solemn sentence pronounced from the chair of Peter in the Church of Peter and Paul can only express faith in the Church». The document also acknowledge that «bishop of Rome, in peculiar circumstances, has the duty to discern and make explicit the faith of the baptized in Communion, and only this», and that the specifical Petrine ministry of universal primate is a «gift» that all Church should accept.

An ecumenical protagonist: the Orthodox Patriarch Kirill

The Orthodox Church often focuses on the issue of the Papal infallibilty. It is not a case that the Orthodox Patriarch Kirill has often spoke of the need of a «practical ecumenism», i.e. an alliance of religions to face – putting aside the doctrinal aspect – the new challenges coming from the social and political changes of this century  imbued by religious indifference and the progressive secularizing trends. This «practical ecumenism» brought the Patriarch – who was one of the contributors of the Basis of the Social Concepts of the Orthodox Church – to ask the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace for a copy of the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church.

Long since a meeting between Benedict XVI and Patriarch Kirill is on agenda. Yet when Alexy II was patriarch, the relationship between Catholics and Orthodox have become less cold thanks to John Paul II, who gifted the Moscow Patriarchate with the icon of the Virgin of Kazan. This made possible that almost all the Orthodox Patriarchates assisted to John Paul II’s funeral and to Benedict XVI’s enthronement, Moscow Patriarchate included: it was an unprecedented fact in the history of the Church. Ever since Kirill became the Patriarch of Moscow – elected with a surprising majority at the synod – the openings of the Orthodox Church toward the Catholic Roman Church increased.

Notwithstanding no representative of the Russian Patriarchate assisted to the ecumenical meeting in Ravenna – because of a polemic with the Costantinople patriarchate – the document on the universal role of the bishop of Rome was then approved also by Moscow. In the Ravenna’s document, the Pope was defined the protos  (first) of Patriarchs, yet they did not agree on how this Papal «primate» had to be practiced. Patriarch Kirill promoted a translation in Russian of the book «Europe, Spiritual Homeland», a collection of Benedict XVI’s speeches about Europe.

The steps forward are undeniable. Kirill himself – meeting the Italian Prime Minister Mario Monti in Mosca – wanted to underline that the relationships with Rome improved. Yet, the official meeting between the Pope and the Patriarch have still not taken place.

An ideal, neutral place for the meeting – it was thought – was Croatia, and the occasion could have been the short Benedict XVI’s trip to Croatia in 2011. Bari was also took in consideration for the meeting – the Southern Italy town’s patron is Saint Nicklaus, who came from Myra, Turkey. Now, Finland is running for hosting the meeting. In June, Kirill met in Moscow three Christian Finnish leaders: the archbishop Leo of the Autonomous Orthodox Church; the Luther archbishop Kari Makinen; the Catholic Bishop of Helsinki Teemu Sippo. These latter invited the patriarch for an official visit in Finland, and they are confident that the Patriarch will accept the invitation. After this meeting, the three went to Rome to celebrate the 70^th anniversary of the diplomatic relations between Holy See and Finland, and there they launched the idea of a possible «meeting», or even of a «joint» visit of Kirill and Benedict XVI to Finland. These are just hypothesis.

On the other hand, within the Orthodox Church there is an anti-Kirill branch that bases its opposition on Kirill’s effort for ecumenism, and this is the real reason why an ecumenical meeting with Rome has not yet been organized – Kirill already met three times Benedict XVI in the Vatican (from 2005 to 2007), when he was president of the Department for external relations of the Moscow Patriarchate. Even Kirill predecessor, Alexy II, had to face an anti-ecumenical branch in Russia: in 1994 Alexy II was even requested by some conservatives members of the Moscow Patriarchate to retire from all the ecumenical organization.

Reconciliation with the Polish Church. A first step

 Kirill is undoubtedly heading toward ecumenism. The last July, 15, he went to Katyn, where Soviet NKVD killed 20,000 officials and members of the cultural-political Polish élite. For years, the bloodshed was credited to Nazis. In Kathyn, Kirill consecrated the new orthodox Church dedicated to the Resurrection of Christ. The image of Our Lady of Czestochowa – that the Polish Catholic bishops gifted to Kirill – will stand upon one of the lateral altars.

Kirill got the image in Poland, where he went in August, 17-19. During the visit, Kirill and Josef Michailik – president of the Polish Bishops’ Conference – signed a document titled «Joint message to the people of Russia and Poland». They worked on the text for two years. In the text, Polish Catholics and Russian Orthodox appeals to «forgiveness, reconciliation and dialogue» in order to heal the wounds of the past and embark on «the way of spiritual and material removal». In the end of the text there is the acclamation to Christ Resurrected «hope for our Churches and for the whole world» and the request for the protection of Mary – to whom Russian and Polish are both very devout – for the great work of reconciliation and approaching «of our Church and our nations».

To forgive, not to forget. Knowing the past – the document states – can so help to discover «the full truth». There is the need – Pawel Przeciszewski, an historical of international relations, maintained – a fair-minded telling of the conflicts between Orthodox and Catholics in Poland (whose borders, in 16^th century, went from Baltic Sea to Black Sea), to be written by representatives of all the people that lived there: Polish, Ukrainians, Latvians, Russians, and many others.

Lutheran and Catholics, a reciprocal mea culpa?

Benedict XVI often made reference to the purification of memory. He talked about it even during the last Schuelerkreis. Among the ideas brainstormed by Ratzinger’s pupils during the three days of meetings – padre Stephan Horn, salvatorian, president of the Students Association, told – there was also the one of a reciprocal mea culpa with Lutheran. The Pope – father Horn explained – «always had in mind that there was the need for a purification of memory». In the homily at the Schuelerkreis final Mass is also inspired by the Benedict XVI’s trips. The Pope talked about this year’s trip in the introduction of the Schuelerkreis. «This years – Stephan Horn says – the Pope was stroke from the joy of faith he found in Benin, as well as in Mexico. Maybe in Cuba society cannot show so freely what they feel. This joy of faith raise great joy in the Holy Father. Who was also very happy for the meeting he had with families in Milan» during the International Families Meeting.

Joy of the faith comes from joy of the law

Benedict XVI’s homily begins with «the joy of the law» – described in the Deuteronomy. A law – he said – « not as a constraint, as something that takes from us our freedom, but as a present and a gift». The Isreal’s law, in fact, comes from God. And – the Pope says – «This is the humble joy of Israel: to receive a gift from God. This is different from triumphalism, from the pride that comes from ourselves: Israel is not proud of her law like Rome may have been of the Roman Law that it gave to humanity, perhaps like France of the Napoleonic Code, like Prussia of the “Preussisches Landrecht”, etc. — legislation we all recognize. But Israel knows: this law was not made by her, it was not the fruit of her genius, it was a gift». The Pope follows: «God showed Israel what is law. God gave Israel wisdom. Wisdom is the art of being human, the art of being able to live well and of being able to die well. And one can live and die well only when the truth has been received and shows us the way: to be grateful for the gift that we did not invent, but that we were given, and to live in wisdom; to learn, thanks to the gift of God, how to be human in the right way».

What is the essential core of law in the Church, i.e. – according to Papal words – «Israel become universal». «This nucleus – the Pope explained –  is simply Christ himself, the love of God for us and our love for him and for all men. He is the living Torah, God’s gift to us, in whom we now receive all the wisdom of God» . And so «joy and gratitude» for reaching the wisdom of good should «for the fact that we can know that we have received the wisdom to live well, that it is what should distinguish the Christian. In fact, in early Christianity it was like this: being free from the shadow of groping along in ignorance — what am I? why am I? how should I move forward? — being made free, being in the light, in the fullness of the truth. This was the fundamental awareness. A gratitude that radiated around and united people in the Church of Jesus Christ».

Nowadays, Church seems to look more at what comes from man than at what comes from God. The Pope says: «I think that we are precisely at that impasse in which we see in the Church only what we ourselves have made, and our joy in the faith is marred; that we no longer believe and no longer dare to say: he has shown us who the truth is, what the truth is; he has shown us what man is; he has given us the law for an upright life. We are concerned only with praising ourselves and we fear being bound by rules that hinder our freedom and the newness of life».

This is a fundamental topic of Ratzinger’s Pontificate. During the last trip to Germany, the Pope – who went there «to speak about God» – even auspicated a less wordly Church in order to turn back to the joy for the true faith.

The Pope warns: « I think that we need to learn anew about “not-having-the-truth”. Just as no one can say: I have children — they are not our possession, they are a gift, and as a gift from God, they are given to us as a responsibility — so we cannot say: I have the truth, but the truth came to us and impels us». It is the reverse. Christ was made man, and so «we must learn to be moved and led by it. And then it will shine again: if the truth itself leads us and penetrates us».

The raid

The raid carried was about the investigation on Finmeccanica, an Italian industry specialized in products for defense – Gotti Tedeschi is not under investigation himself, but he could be in possession of papers of Finmeccanica that the CEO of Finmeccanica Fernando Orsi (they’re good friends) consigned him. Even if the investigation on Finmeccanica is not of any particular interest for those who cover the Vatican, it became newsworthy that – among the folders seized by the investigators to Gotti Tedeschi – there was a «memorandum »  that the former president of the I.O.R. was drafting to send to Mons. Georg Gaenswein, secretary of Benedict XVI, so it could be delivered directly to the Pope.

I.O.R. folders?

Gotti Tedeschi  was also reported to keep in his house 47 folders from the I.O.R. Some reports say that the folders would contain information about some I.O.R. accounts – especially of politician, as the ex I.O.R. president would have said -  but the Gotti Tedeschi’s lawyer Palazzo denied it. In the correspondence with some Curial officials, Gotti Tedeschi denounced a «plot» against him. Tedeschi described it as a «Judaic-Masonic »  plot . Tedeschi reportedly thought that : Marco Simeon (33 years old, foreign relations account manager and deputy to the relationship with the institutions of the Italian state television, Rai, and ad interim director of Rai Vaticano,which covers the Holy See) and the lawyer Michele Briamonte (from the office of Franzo Grande Stevens) were part of this plot. Within the Gotti Tedeschi’s sight was also Jeffrey Lena, the Holy See lawyer in the United States who recently has come to live in Rome to work on the reform of Vatican law n. 127 against money laundering, and who is now working along with Vatican officials to prepare the documentation for the July 4^thplenary assembly of MONEYVAL – the body of the Council of Europe that evaluates the adherence to the anti-money laundering norms of Council of Europe State members. MONEYVAL advisors will present their report about Holy See compliance to the plenary assembly.  There had been 3 meetings between MONEYVAL advisors and the Holy See – two on site visits of MONEYVAL advisors to the Vatican and a meeting in Strasbourg. All the work of the Holy See’s« financial branch » are in preparation for the 4^th of July meeting.

The efforts of the Holy See for financial transparency

The fact that the Holy See changed law n.127 just one year after its promulgation in order to make it adhere to international standards shows the Holy See’s specific and long term commitment to transparency. Yet, the reform had been particularly resisted by the «architects »  of the «old » law n. 127. Among these architects, Card. Attilio Nicora, president of the Authority of Financial Information, defined the new law as «a step back » . Ettore Gotti Tedeschi was also among the critics. He did not formally take part in the drafting of the old law. But he recommended  Marcello Condemi and Francesco De Pasquale as advisors, who were later appointed member and president, respectively, of the Authority for Financial Information.  They came from the Bank of Italy ranks and .defended wholeheartedly the law.

The old law n. 127 would «justify » Gotti Tedeschi’s decision – questionable, according to several observers – to declare before Italian magistrates about 23 million transferred by the IOR in 2010, although the magistrates did not make a proper international request. Gotti Tedeschi also convinced Paolo Cipriani, general manager of the I.O.R., to go and speak to the Italian magistrates. Cipriani was in favor of Holy See transparency, and at the same time he wanted to protect Holy See sovereignty. With the Guardia di Finanza (the Italian financial police) Cipriani holds informal relationships: anytime he is asked for information, he fulfill the request, except in the cases that would be detrimental to the sovereignty of the Holy See. The Guardia di Finanza once sent him a note to thank him for his quickness and precision in his answers.

A man rebuilding his image

So, there is a whole world in the Holy See that keeps on working, while outside the Vatican City State Ettore Gotti Tedeschi is on the spot. If, in the past, the former president of the I.O.R. was seen a strong defender of transparency, now Ettore Gotti Tedeschi is projecting his image of a person under attack, in order to get back to the previous image. In fact, his behavior has been censored by many inside the Vatican. The memorandum of the meeting of the board of Superitendance of the I.O.R. that voted the no confidence on Gotti Tedeschi listed nine accusations against the president of the I.O.R. Among these, one was of «erratic »  behavior. And Ettore Gotti Tedeschi seems to keep on his erratic behavior even now that he is out of the Vatican.

Vatican transparency

During his two years and a half as president of the board of Superintendence, Ettore Gotti Tedeschi collected a lot of information, and some of it is being leaked to the press. The media polemicizes the ciphered accounts of the I.O.R. But this should not be shocking:  the I.O.R. is not a bank. It is a “Pontifical body”, whose funds are at the disposal of the Pope. It is something more similar to a Trust than to a bank. I.O.R. accounts have always been given ciphered codes, rather than names, even if the accountes are not secret, and the information on them is complete. The «transparency operation »  began under Angelo Caloia, president of the body of Surveillance of the I.O.R. before Gotti Tedeschi. Since 2002, Caloia adopted the KYC policy, i.e. Know Your Customer. Each customer of the Institute was carefully analyzed. Obviously, since it is not a bank, I.O.R. cannot transfer money by itself. So it opens several bank accounts – especially in Deutsche Bank -  and there the money is transferred, and all the money movements can be traced. Since  the promulgation of the Vatican anti-money laundering law, each transfer must be justified and explained in a very precise manner, and that is why I.O.R. asks its customers to fill an appropriate form that some customers do not like. It is not even newswothy that in the I.O.R. there are the so called « lay » accounts, i.e. accounts that do not belong to cardinals or religious congregations, but to people outside of the Holy See. The opening of this kind of accounts is also covered in the anti-money laundering law. Paolo Cipriani – the I.O.R. general manager – said in an interview published on the Italian newspaper Il Corriere della Sera that there are no numbered accounts at the Vatican bank and the only Italians, apart from priests, monks and nuns, who banked with the IOR were lay employees or pensioners of the Holy See. Cipriani added that Gotti Tedeschi had been invited to inspect lists of accounts, but – Cipriani says – «he didn’t take things in hand. It was as if he were absent, even when he was present».

(false) Information

All of these (false) information is part of a strong press campaign. Gotti Tedeschi could not come to terms with receiving a no confidence vote by the board of I.O.R. and a press release that some observers defined « a declaration of war » . Several Italian media outlets proposed an external commission to evaluate how Ettore Gotti Tedeschi worked in the I.O.R. And his friends in finance and industry defended Ettore Gotti Tedeschi on the prominent Italian newspaper Il Corriere della Sera. After that, they tried to set up a sort of independent commission whose spokesperson would be Vito Gamberale, president of the Fund F2i, among whose members is Gotti Tedeschi.. Then, after the raid that brought to the seizure of his papers, and so also of the I.O.R. document, it seems that Gotti Tedeschi thought that he could trumpet his view through the Italian magistrate – the public prosecutor of Rome denied to have taken “Vatican” dossiers, but maybe the public prosecutor of Naples will do it; finally, it also seems that he may want to write a book, a Vatican best-seller that will forever save him from the accusation of being erratic.

More or less fanciful stories of how things went on come out from the same circles that spread misinformation about Gotti Tedeschi being under attack. And so we could read that Gotti Tedeschi had been fired because everybody in the Vatican opposed his transparency policy. Even that Gotti Tedeschi was victim of the American lobby of the Knights of Columbus.  The drafter of the memorandum of no confidence, Carl A. Anderson, was also among the first to speak up against Gotti Tedeschi in the Vatican.  A letter from Anderson criticizing the former president of the I.O.R. has been leaked to the press.  Anderson is the Supreme Knight of the Knights of Columbus. But fact, the Knights of Columbus are beyond suspicion. Their founder, Michael J. McGivney, is going to be beatified. They cooperate with the Holy See since the Benedict XV pontificate, they do not hesitate to send financial aid when requested, and they help poor. The wealth of the Knights of Columbus comes from a leading insurance society they manage, which has always gained Triple A financial ratings for its reliability.

Was there a war?

That the Knights of Columbus would like to take possession of the Holy See, getting rid of Opus Dei, is unsubstantiated. It was not only Carl A. Anderson statements and opinion that brought about the no confidence vote on Gotti Tedeschi. The four members of the board of Surveillance of the I.O.R., completely agree, and as the letters leaked to the Italian newspaper Il Fatto Quotidiano show.  Both Carl A. Anders and Rolando Schmitz – another member of the board – recommended the no confidence on Gotti Tedeschi. The letters were addressed to Cardinal Bertone, the “president” of the Commission of Cardinals that manages the I.O.R. Rolando Schmitz also wrote to Bertone that he would resign if an eventual no confidence vote of the board would not be confirmed by the commission of cardinals.

A press release

All of these rumors – coming out from circles very close to Gotti Tedeschi, and some say from Gotti Tedeschi himself – damage the reputation of the Holy See. This why the Holy See wanted to do away with the utter chatter with the Friday, 8^th of June press release underlining its « surprise and concern»  for the «recent events »  involvingEttoreGotti Tedeschi. The Holy See also says that it trusts that «the prerogatives acknowledged to the Holy See by the international legal order are being adequately considered and respected »  by the Italian judicial authorities.

The Holy See statement is a message to the Italian magistrates that are canvassing and studying the Gotti Tedeschi memorandum of its days as president of the I.O.R. In fact, the Italian public prosecutor denied to have taken documents about the I.O.R.: those papers had been found, seized and then sealed. But the investigators obviously glanced them. And the Holy See reminds all that those are documents from a sovereign country, seized to an ex president of a « body of State ».

Even if Gotti Tedeschi does not enjoy a “functional” immunity as president of the I.O.R. since the no confidence vote, those papers are from the time when he was in charge, and they are not part of the enquiry on Finmeccanica. The Holy See press release goes beyond, setting the record straight about what has been written during these days. First of all, «the Holy See confirms his full trust in the people whoworkat theInstitute for Religious Works with commitment and professionality»; and it is « examining with the maximum care»  the possible damage infringed upon the rights of the Institute and of its bodies. So, there is the possibility of a legal action. And this possibility upholds the « transparency line »  wanted by Benedict XVI: there is nothing to hide, and so there is nothing to deny. There is simply a desire to do away with any falsity.

What the Holy See is doing

The raid of the house and the office of Ettore Gotti Tedeschi gave rise to the rumors about the motives of the no confidence vote. Even in this case, it was the same I.O.R. to speak in a fair and strong manner – even too candidly for some internal observers. The Holy See confirms once again that the « no confidence vote on Ettore Gotti Tedeschi by the Board of Superintendence was rooted on objective reasons, concerning the governance of the Institute, and not determined by a presumed opposition to transparency, which the Holy See and the I.O.R. itself particularly care for».

So much care that it reworked the law n. 127 anti money-laundering not even one year after its promulgation. Holy See is working to fulfill the European request and to adhere to the international standars. For what concern the new law, MONEYVAL advisors focused on the new role of the Authority of Financial Information, that it is still crucial on the anti money-laundering law of the Holy See, but that it is now placed in a larger institutional settings that includes the State Secretariat, the Vatican City State Administration and the Gendarme Corps. The “presence” of the Secretariat of State among the bodies involved in trasparency – it deals with internal and international policy – does not seem to be evaluated negatively by te MONEYVAL advisors.  For what concerns the “controlled” body, the I.O.R. seems to be evaluate for great part adherent to the international standards. This would contrast the accusation of Gotti Tedeschi. Who told that he had been «fired because of his work for transparency». And whose story is taking attention away from the Holy See work.

His reform is something more similar to Gregory VII. That of Gregorian reform is an heroic enterprise, brought on by a few man that works to re-moralized their society and so purify the Church. People gathered around Ildebrando of Soana begins a movement whose effect were so vast that a whole world change. Will this happen with the Benedict XVI’s Papacy?

Elected Pope with the name of Gregory VII, Ildebrando do not only care about the purification and moralization of the Church. He also collect the ancient sources, so creating a corpus of papers that will be the first global law of the world, the Canon Law. More, he defends the autonomy of the Church. In Dictatus Papae, Gregory VII affirms the supremacy of the Pope on any other power, the imperial one included. Then, he organizes the Pontifical Legates network. He establishes two kind of Pontifical Legates: the one in loco, charged by the Pope to look after the application of Gregorian reform on a territory; and the one sent by  Rome to accomplish mission in a foreign countries. The defense of the autonomy and sovereignty of the Church is also brought on, during the Gregorian Age, by creating new canonic collection. Gregory VII auspicates the research of the sources of the law, and so many researchers look for documents that affirms that the Papal authority is the source of the law. This research will bring to light the writings of Attone, Anselm from Lucca, Deusdedit.

It is the work Benedict XVI is doing as well. Joseph Ratzinger began his theological research with his Doctoral thesis on the «People of God and House of God in Saint Augustine’s Doctrine of the Church» – defended in 1951 -, and he has always been aware that he needed to look back to the Church, and then he understood that the Church needed to be less worldy, and that being less wordly means to change and unify. Finally, the Canon Law is the tool that the Church has to do it.

Benedict XVI wants to focus on Canon Law, and this is one of the reasons why the Secretary of State is a Canonist and the last Papal nuncios appointed is Charles J. Brown, a non diplomat that served for years in the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. This comeback of the Canon Law is driving the Benedict XVI’s choice for what concern international relations, and even for what concern its commitment for financial transparency. This led to a renewed Vatican anti-money laundering law. Not everybody had been happy about it, inside and outside the Vatican Walls. Why?

The new text of anti-money laundering Vatican Law come into effect

There had been no modification to the Decree n. 159 issued by the Pontifical Commission for Vatican City State. The last 25th of January, Holy See issued the decree n. 159 to amend the Vatican City State Law n. 127 concerning the countering of money laundering and financing of terrorism. As the art. 7 of the Fundamental Law of Vatican City State, the President of the Pontifical Commission for Vatican City State  «in cases of urgent necessity, he can issue dispositions having the force of law, which  however lose their force if they are not confirmed by the Commission within ninety days». The Commission confirmed the decree and – beyond whatever it has been written and told during these last three months – there were no doubts about it.

Anti money-laundering Vatican law: a never ending debate

Ever since the Law n. 127 had been issued, the Governatorate knew that this law had been written in a hurry, under the pressure of the investigation of the Public Prosecutor of Rome on two money transfer ordered by the I.O.R. (the Institute for Religious Works), and with the necessity to fully comply to the norms required by the European Union in the Monetary Convention signed by the Holy See in 2009. Yet while Holy See and European Union were discussing the terms of the Monetary Convention, the then number two of Vatican City State Carlo Maria Viganò showed himself doubtful about what the on-going discussion was going to ask to the Holy See, and proposed to unhook the Holy See by Euro area, in order to preserve its sovereignty.

The law n. 127 reassured Italian prosecutors, but on the other hand it did not completely fit to the international standards. The decree was an improvement of the law promoted by the Vatican City State administration in order to fit to international standards and at the same time to let them adhere to a peculiar State that is Vatican City State, while preserving the Holy See sovereignty.

An Italian problem?

Yet, during these last three months, Italian medias highlighted several rumors coming from «inside the Vatican» against the improvement of the law 127. Il Fatto Quotidiano – one of the most prominent and aggressive Italian newspaper – published a series of leaks of reserved documents. Among these documents, there was also an e-mail sent by the Director of the Authority for Financial Information Francesco De Pasquale (the controller) to the president of the Council of Superintendency of the I.O.R. (the controlled). This documents proved a questionable relationship between two parts of the mechanism of control of the Holy See, and at the same time proved that an animated debate took place within the Sacred Walls about the improvement of the Vatican Law n. 127.

It had been also leaked to Il Fatto Quotidiano a notation by cardinal Attilio Nicora, president of the Authority for Financial Information (but also member of the Council of Superintendecy of the I.O.R., member of the Commission for the Governatorate of Vatican City State and member of the so-called Council of 15, the assembly of 15 cardinals that periodically meet to take stock of the Vatican financial situation). In this notation, Nicora described the amendments to the Law n. 127 as “step behind” confronting with the previous text, which he blessed and promoted. More. The last March, the 19th, an article published on Il Corriere della Sera, the most spread Italian newspaper, let understand that Nicora himself was working to rewrite the text of the decree n.159, in order to bring the law back to the “old” law n. 127. The article proved that – inside the Vatican – the debate never ended.

Why the anti-money laundering law changed

The amendments to the Law n.127 had been requested by the advisors of MONEYVAL, the body of the Council of Europe that analyze and judge the adherence of the States to the 40+9 GAFI recommendations for contrasting money laundering and financing of terrorism. Marcello Condemi, a member of the Vatican Authority for Financial Information and draftsman of the first sketch of the old law n. 127, worked on a second sketch of the law right after the first on site visit of the MONEYVAL advisors in Vatican, that took place in November 2011. Several debates within the Sacred Walls followed. Finally, with the decree n. 159, the law n. 127 had been essentially modified. The “new” law n. 127 is now more adherent to international standard. It strengthens the power of controlling of the Authority for Financial Information, but at the same time distributed the controlling powers on several bodies of the Holy See, according to the principle of the separation of powers (even the Gendarm Corps is now encouraged to strengthen its intelligence in order to take part to the countering of money laundering with proper tools of investigation).  It gave to the Vatican Secreteriat of State the complete management of the relationships between States – «The Secretariat of State – it is written in the decree n. 159, art. 2 quinquies – foster the adhesion of the Holy See to treaties and international agreements, as well as the relations and the participation of the Holy See to institution and international organization qualified to define norms and good practices for what concerns the prevention and countering of money laundering and financing of terrorism».

That the effort of the Holy See had been to adhere to international standards for what concerns the countering of money laundering without denaturalize its own institution is evident when – in the decree n. 159 – the procedures to take into consideration the list of terror organizations issued by the Security Council of United Nations. According to the law n. 127, Holy See does not mechanically transpose the United Nations Lists. This choice is aimed to preserve the Holy See and Vatican neutrality. In fact, lists are written under the «Chapter 7» of Charter of the United Nations, and that Chapter is applied in war time. Holy See could be embarrassed by a mechanical transposition of the lists, since it could be in contradiction with the Holy See orientation –  Holy See is traditionally neutral and in favor of peace. Since Holy See is a Permanent Observer to the Assembly of United Nations, and not a Full Member, a settlement has been made to the autonomy of the Holy See: the Vatican Secretariat of State – according to the new article 24 of the law n. 127– will draw up its own list of terror organizations that will be based on the one issued by the United Nations, so keeping its autonomy, and at the same time showing to be sensitive to the international security goals. Holy See so maintain its autonomy, but at the same time proves sensibility to the international security goal .

Is there a biggest target?

Maybe there is a biggest target on the basis of the polemics that followed the one the another from the moment in which the Holy See began the process enrolled in the «White List», the list of states most active in preventing and fighting the financial crimes.. The critics to the lack of transparency of Vatican finance would hide a sort of attack to the sovereignty of the Holy See itself. Documents leaked by the press – the so-called Vatileaks, that are now under the investigation of a commission made up of the cardinals Herranz, De Giorgi and Tomko – prove that the «sovereignty issue» has never been taken into consideration by the «step behind» theorists. The leaks are about the retroactivity of the «new» law n. 127; about the will to cooperate with Italian investigators; about a diligence toward Italian authorities that led Ettore Gotti Tedeschi to be voluntarily questioned by the Italian magistrates without these latter submitted the request internationally.

Yet, Paolo Cipriani, General Director of the Institute for Religious Works, explained – during one of the seminars periodically held by the I.O:R. to train the administrators of the Congregation with deposits in the «Vatican bank» – that the Institute has always responded to any request submitted by Prosecutors or Central Banks. The responses by the Holy See, Cipriani explained, had come formally – there had been during the last ten years 20 requests submitted internationally to the Holy See (it is a global data, it does not concerns the only I.O.R.): 19 had been fulfilled by the Vatican City State, the last one has been judged by a Vatican Court – and not formally, for a sort of «good neighborhood relationships» with the other financial institutes. Holy See – Cipriani also underlined – did not answer in the only case the request would be considered a vulnus to its sovereignty.

A wider – international – perspective

It is now time to see things from a wider perspective. The announcement of the improvement of the law n. 127 has been launch in the Osservatore Romano, the newspaper of the Holy See, in an article by msgr. Dominique Mamberti, the «foreign minister» of the Holy See. Mamberti linked the news of the improvement of the law n. 127 to the ratification by the Holy See of three international threaties – the news about the ratification had been given the 25th of January as well. Holy See adhered to and ratified the International Convention for the Suppression of the financing of terrorism(Onu, New York, 1999) and the United Nations Conventions against the transnational organized crime (Palermo, 2000). Holy See also announced the ratification of the United Nations Convention against illicit traffic in narcotics drugs and psychotropic substances (Wien, 1998): this latter Convention had been already signed by the Holy See when it had been adopted by United Nations.

It’s a long time that the campaigns to expell Holy See by the concert of Nations – as the See Change campaign – broke down in the public opinion. In 2007, The Economist – one of the most authoritative magazines in the world – published an article headlined “God’s ambassadors” about the Vatican diplomacy. The article ended with this advice for the Holy See: «It could renounce its special diplomatic status and call itself what it is – the biggest non-governmental organization in the world».

Within the bureaus of the United Nations and of the other major international organization in which the Holy See seats as an observer, the idea to expel Holy See from the concert of nations is widely spreads. Even if this idea did not succed, and – on the other hand – on July 2004 the General Assembly of United Nations approved a resolution that not only confirm, but even enhanced the presence of the Holy See within the United Nations.

So, a more subtle strategy began. This strategy – brought on in international environments – aims to undermine the moral power of the Catholic Church and of religions in general. It consists in remarking that religious freedom is something like the freedom of expression, or in confusing the religious freedom with the freedom of worship. Vatican diplomacy is undermined, too. If Italian Prime Minister Mario Monti caused an «earthquake» at the Italian Ministry for Foreign Affair by showing his intention to appoint ambassadors not raised up with a diplomatic career, Vatican insiders refer about the intention to appoint lay people as diplomatic representative of the Holy See. Pontifical Legates must be bishops, since they represent the Pope. This rule is valid and effective only for Papal nuncios: they work as Papal ambassadors, they keep relationships with the governments, and at the same time they work as bishops, speaking to the Episcopal Conferences of the countries they are appointed at, give their opinion about the to-be-appointed bishops.

Nuncios that are appointed as permanent observer within the International organizations (United Nations, U.N.E.S.C.O., F.A.O., European Parliament) must only care the relationships between the Holy See and the governments. This would open to the appointment of lay people as permanent observers of the Holy See.

Could this be the beginning of a weakening of the Vatican diplomacy? In the book C’era una volta un Vaticano (Once upon a time a Vatican), Massimo Franco, underlines this lack of international appeal of the Holy See. Too appeased on Italy and on its relations with Italy – Massimo Franco writes .- the Holy See lost sight of its wide global horizon that made of it the most long-lived and solid institution in the world. Canon right is the first really global and globalized law of the history, and it still consists in a solidity that no friendly diplomatic relations would touch.

This same problem spoiled the path to the Vatican financial transparency. Holy See borders are not anymore with Italy, but with the whole Europe. Yet, the members of the Authority for Financial Information are all Italian, coming from the Bank of Italy milieau – even if the Bank of Italy proved a certain hostility toward the Holy See (the investigation of the Roman prosecutors undermined the Holy See sovereignty, since prosecutors asked for information to the Financial Intelligence Unit of the Bank of Italy – which should be independent – instead of investigating with the Guardia di Finanza).

The “old” law n. 127 would have probably solved the “judicial” problems with Italy, but certainly it would also set back – if not avoided – the Holy See path to the white list. The Plenary Assembly of MONEYVAL will meet the next July, and on that occasion the report about Holy See will be issued. It will not be at that moment that the Council of Europe will decide about the enlistment – or the not enlistment – of the Holy See among the virtuous States. But probably, the possibility to be part of the white list would have been more difficult without the improvement of the law n. 127, that the MONEYVAL advisors auspicated.