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.

The international scenario is not encouraging. The United States avoided the default thanks to the debt ceiling agreement, but the credit of the United States had been first downgraded by the Chinese rating agency  Dagong  and then downgraded by Standard&Poors. In the meantime, the Holy See is working intensely to outline a reform of the world monetary system.  In the encyclical Caritas in veritate there were several points remarking it. One above all, the so-called world political authority paragraph. There is the need of a true world political authority – the Pope wrote – «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».

A new monetary system could not prescind from a global authority, an authority – an official to the Holy See explains – that «needs to have universal competences and needs to be public». The next G20 – scheduled in Cannes for November, 3-4 – will be on financial markets and world economy. It will be the occasion, for the Holy See, to present his proposal to reform the international monetary system. A first sketch of the reform – now under the examination of Holy See consultants and officials – had been proposed by Michel Camdessus, former president of International Monetary Fund. Camdessus is a consultant of the Holy See, but it will also be a member of the French delegation at G20. France is also the hosting country of the summit. For this reason, there is the opportunity that the proposals of the Holy See will  be at least taken in serious consideration.

Facing the global crisis, many countries began thinking about a reform of the monetary system. Nicolas Sarkozy, president of France, talked about enlarging the G7 to better manage currency markets, expand the International Monetary Fund’s oversight capacity in the field, and to the IMF’s currency basket, Special Drawing Right (SDR),the currencies of emerging economies, like the Chinese yuan. «France supports modifying the IMF’s status to expand its oversight capacity», Sarkozy he noted. This can counter what the president of France views as a «proliferation of unilateral measures during crises resulting in a new financial protectionism in which all economies suffer».

The Holy See will make different proposal. The Vatican diplomacy expressed several times doubts about G20 and the international congresses of that kind, considered something more than a club of friends, with no executive power. Holy See asked for a World Government, since it knows that there is the need of an authority over the State sovereignty and with the goal of the common good. The proposal will be different even from the Camdessus first sketch. Camdessus position is more similar to French one. France – and many other countries, as well – think to a world currency in order to have a concrete currency to refer to. Since the dollar is not convertible in gold, it has no real reference in the economy. The solution the G20 is up to give can be just the one of a financial adjustments decided among the few that will met in Cannes. This – according to Holy See position – is not sufficient. In 2009, the Holy See asked the Doha round to be enlarged to the opinions of the excluded countries. This is still the Holy See position. The reform of the monetary system pass through the reform of the United Nations and the reform of International Monetary Fund. The true fight is between the world leaders that still think that the world order could be managed in restricted meeting and the ones that aim at a true multilateral policy. Camdessus first sketch was going toward the first position. Holy See is going in another direction, and its polar star is the common good of peoples.

It was the common good the goal of the delegation that gathered at Mount Washington Hotel, in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, in 1944. Preparing to rebuild the international economic system as World War II was still raging, 730 delegates from all 44 Allied deliberated to abandon the Gold Standard – the monetary system based on the convertibility of all the currencies in gold – and to embrace a more appropriate system for capitalism. In fact, the new international monetary system was a return to a system similar to the pre-war gold standard, only using US dollars as the world’s new reserve currency until the world’s gold supply could be reallocated via international trade.

Two projects of a new monetary system had been discussed in Bretton Woods. The first project was by the English economist John Maynard Keynes. Keynes outlined the institution of a Central World Bank, in order to intervene on the markets to regulate the relationships between debtors and creditors. The bank was supposed to have its own currency, that Keynes called Bancor. The second project was by Harry Dexter White, under-secretary of the Us  Ministry of the Treasure, and outlined a simple leveling-off fund of tax exchanges. The result was a compromise: the economic policies of the State would be coordinated by the International Monetary Fund and from the World Bank; the dollar become the only currency convertible in gold, so having a central role in the economical system.

But Europe – and in particular Germany – lived an incredible economical growth. Always more creditors asked to convert their dollars in gold. In 1971, the Us president Richard Nixon unilaterally suspended the convertibility of Us dollars in gold. It was the end of Bretton Woods. It was the beginning of a variable economy world. The yellow gold was up to be substitute by the black gold, the oil – during the Seventies the oil crisis became a central topic of financial issues.

Here and then, the idea of a world currency letted out from the think-rooms of the Council on Foreign Relations, of Trilateral commission – a group founded by David Rockfeller in 1973, whose member are, or has been, Henry Kissinger, Zygmunt Brzezinsky, George Bush sr., Dick Cheney -, and of Bildeberg Group. In 1988, The Economist – an English magazine read with much attention even in the Vatican Secretariat of State – launched the idea of a world currency named Phoenix. The International Monetary Fund created in 1969 the “embryo” of a new kind of currency, the Special Drawing Rights (SDR). SDRs are not credits the State have with the International Monetary Fund. The State, on the other hand, can sell SDRs, so sustaining their own currency. The world currency auspicated by president Sarkozy would be, in some way, and evolution of SDRs. Something similar to the “bubble that will save us” outlined a couple years ago by Ettore Gotti Tedeschi, president of the I.O.R. (Institute for Religious Works, the “bank” of the Vatican), in an article on the Holy See’s daily Osservatore Romano. Something similar to what the Trilateral Commission outlined in 1989 in a report titled: “International Financial Integration: the Policy Challenges”.

The Holy See looks beyond, conscious that nowadays international finance is made up of fictitious capital. The Holy See aims to re-anchor the international monetary system to the real economy. In fact – officials of the Roman Curia underline – it was not globalization to let multinational groups and private interests take the control of global economy. It was the States to abdicate part of their sovereignty in the name of profit, and now they are stuck in the system.

In the mean time, China downgraded the United States financial rating, and this caused the fall of Western stock exchanges. Until now, China has always been marginalized by the Western economic world. But now its economy has so flourished to let the China “fire” all European and American bonds without consequences in their internal balance. China is now claiming for more weight in the international issues. Somebody is wondering – it is just an attractive hypothesis – if it was the Chinese offence for having been marginalized in the international scenario at the origin of the exacerbation of the Chinese diplomatic relationship with the Holy See.

The Holy See have a great International prestige. Neverthless the See Change campaign, the Holy See is Un Permanent Observer with reinforced powers. Every time the permanent observer speaks during the general assembly, even the sleepiest among the delegates pay much attention to the Holy See Statements. Holy See is now one of the few – if not the only one – asking for a really multilateral international policy. And it was one of the first to preview the fall of the false gods.

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?