In God's Name

by David Yallop

  The world awaits this today; it knows well that the sublime perfection it has attained by research and technology has already reached a peak, beyond which yawns the abyss, blinding the eyes with darkness. It is the temptation of substituting for God one’s own decisions, decisions that would prescind from moral laws. The danger for modern man is that he would reduce the earth to a desert, the person to an automaton, brotherly love to planned collectivization, often introducing death where God wishes life.

  With the text of Lumen gentium (the Light of Nations), Vatican Council’s Dogmatic Constitution of the Church, in his hand, Albino Luciani gave notice that he intended to put the Church back where it belonged: back to the world and the words of Christ; back to the simplicity and honesty of its origins. If Christ returned to earth, Luciani wanted him to find a Church he would recognize – one free of political interests, free of the big business mentality which had corroded the original vision.

  At noon the new Pope appeared on the central balcony of the Basilica. The square below was packed tight with some 200,000 people. Millions more around the world watched on television as Luciani’s smile broadened in response to the thunderous applause. He had come out to say the Angelus but before giving the mid-day prayer he had decided to give his listeners a glimpse into the secret Conclave. When the applause and cheering had died down he promptly broke two Papal rules, the paranoiac secrecy that Paul had sternly insisted upon concerning the Conclave, and the use of the majestic ‘we’ that for nearly two thousand years had demonstrated Papal aspirations to territory. He smiled at the crowd and then began.

  ‘Yesterday,’ the word was followed by an almost imperceptible shrug of the shoulders, as if to say, ‘a funny thing happened to me on my way to the Conclave.’ The crowd roared with laughter. Luciani joined in the merriment, then began again.

  ‘Yesterday morning I went to the Sistine Chapel to vote peacefully. Never could I have imagined what was about to take place. As soon as it began to be a danger for me, two of my colleagues who were sitting near me whispered words of encouragement.’ Simply and without trace of pomposity he recalled the words of Willebrands and Ribeno. He told the crowd why he had chosen his particular name.

  My thoughts were like this. Pope John had wanted to consecrate me with his own hands here in the Basilica of St Peter’s. Then, though unworthy, I succeeded him in the Cathedral of St Mark, in that Venice which is still filled with the spirit of Pope John. The gondoliers remember him, the sisters, everyone. On the other hand Pope Paul not only made me a cardinal, but some months before that, on the wide footbridge in St Mark’s Square, he made me blush to the roots of my hair in front of twenty thousand people, because he took off his stole and placed it on my shoulders. I was never so red-faced. Furthermore, in the fifteen years of his pontificate, this Pope showed not only me but the whole world how he loved the Church, how he served it, worked for it, and suffered for this Church of Christ. And so I took the name John Paul.

  Be sure of this. I do not have the wisdom of heart of Pope John, nor do I have the preparation and culture of Pope Paul. However, I now stand in their place. I will seek to serve the Church and I hope that you will help me with your prayers.

  With those simple, everyday words followed by the Angelus and his Blessing, Pope John Paul I announced his arrival to the world. The warm, enthusiastic response of the Rome crowd was an accurate reflection of the larger, watching world.

  Vatican watchers puzzled over the clues to the new Papacy contained in the choice of names. Is he John or is he Paul? One of those who was asked was Cardinal Suenens: ‘He will be both in his own way. His manner is closer to John’s but it is like mixing oxygen and hydrogen – you get water, two different elements producing a third substance.’

  His chosen names hint at a continuity, but the fact that John Paul included the designation ‘The First’, a convention that is never applied until there is a second of the same name, should have told the Vatican watchers something. What they and the rest of the Church were about to experience related to neither of the new Pope’s immediate predecessors. It was unique.

  He had not spelled out to the listening world on this his first day, exactly how he intended to make his dream of a poor Church a reality but within hours he embarked on a course of action that was of vital importance if his vision was to be realized.

  In the evening of Sunday, August 27th, 1978 he had dinner with Cardinal Jean Villot and asked him to continue, at least for a while, as Secretary of State. Villot accepted. The new Pope also reconfirmed the various cardinals in charge of the departments of the Roman Curia. Having entered the Conclave without any aspirations to become Pope it would have been extraordinary if he had emerged with a prepared list of new Cabinet members.

  On August 31st Italy’s leading and highly respected economic periodical, Il Mondo, addressed a long, open letter to Albino Luciani. The letter asked for Papal intervention to impose ‘order and morality’ on the Vatican’s financial dealings which included ‘speculation in unhealthy waters’. The letter, entitled ‘Your Holiness, Is It Right?’, made a series of slashing attacks on what it saw to be the state of affairs inside the Vatican’s financial operations. Accompanying the open letter was a long analysis entitled ‘The Wealth of Peter’.

  Il Mondo asked Albino Luciani a number of highly relevant questions:

  Is it right for the Vatican to operate in markets like a speculator? Is it right for the Vatican to have a Bank whose operations help the illegal transfer of capital from Italy to other countries? Is it right for that Bank to assist Italians in evading tax?

  Financial editor Paolo Panerai attacked the Vatican links with Michele Sindona. He attacked Luigi Mennini and Paul Marcinkus of the Vatican Bank and their relationships with ‘the most cynical financial dealers in the world, from Sindona to the bosses of the Continental Illinois Bank in Chicago (through which, as Your Holiness’s advisers can tell you, all of the Church’s investments in the United States are handled)’.

  Panerai asked:

  Why does the Church tolerate investments in companies, national and multi-national, whose only aim is profit; companies which, when necessary, are ready to violate and trample upon the human rights of millions of the poor, especially in that Third World which is so close to Your Holiness’s heart?

  Of Marcinkus the open letter observed:

  He is, however, the only Bishop who is on the Board of a Lay Bank, which incidentally has a Branch in one of the great tax havens of the capitalistic world. We mean the Cisalpine Overseas Bank at Nassau in the Bahamas. Using tax havens is permitted by earthly Law, and no lay banker can be hauled into court for taking advantage of that situation (they all do); but perhaps it is not licit under God’s Law, which should mark every act of the Church. The Church preaches equality but it does not seem to us that the best way to ensure equality is by evading taxes, which constitute the means by which the Law state tries to promote the same equality.

  There was no official reaction from the Vatican, but inside Vatican City the responses ranged from quiet satisfaction felt by those who objected to the activities of the Vatican Bank and the Extraordinary Section of the Administration of the Patrimony of the Holy See (APSA), to anger and resentment from those who considered that the only problem with the Vatican’s financial speculations was that they should make even bigger profits.

  The Italian newspaper, La Stampa, weighed in with another piece entitled ‘The Wealth and Powers of the Vatican’. Journalist Lamberto Furno took a largely sympathetic look at Vatican finances and discounted some of the accusations that had been published over the years alleging massive Vatican wealth. But Furno did see a number of pressing problems facing the new Pope, including verification that the Church reforms to achieve a state of poverty, which in Furno’s mind had been implemented by Pope John and continued by Pope Paul, had become a reality. This could be achieved only by ‘publishing the Vatican budgets’.

  Furno concluded:

  The Church does
not have riches or resources that exceed its needs. But it is necessary to give proof of this. Bernanos has his country Curate observing, ‘on sacks of money our Lord has written in his own hand, “Danger of death”’.

  The new Pope read these articles with interest. They confirmed in his mind the wisdom of a course he had already embarked upon.

  Before his election, Luciani had been aware of the many complaints about Vatican finances which had been aired to Cardinal Villot: complaints about the way that Bishop Marcinkus ran the Vatican Bank; complaints about his involvement with Michele Sindona; complaints about the links between the APSA and Sindona. Luciani had personal experience of the manner in which Marcinkus operated the Vatican Bank; experience dating from 1972, when Marcinkus had sold the controlling interest in Banca Cattolica del Veneto to Calvi, without reference to the Patriarch of Venice.

  He knew as early as 1972 that there was something terribly wrong with the whole structure and philosophy of Vatican finance but he had been powerless. Now he had the power. On Sunday, August 27th, 1978, as he sat eating dinner with Cardinal Villot, he instructed his newly confirmed Secretary of State to initiate an investigation immediately. There was to be a review of the entire financial operation of the Vatican; a detailed analysis of every aspect. ‘No department, no congregation, no section is to be excluded,’ Luciani told Villot.

  He made it clear that he was particularly concerned with the operation of the Istituto per le Opere di Religione, the Institute for Religious Works, generally known as the Vatican Bank. The financial review was to be done discreetly, quickly, and completely. The new Pope advised his Secretary of State that once he had considered the report he would decide on appropriate courses of action.

  Clearly Luciani was a firm believer in practising what he preached. In one of his ‘letters’ to St Bernard he had discussed the virtue of prudence.

  I agree that prudence should be dynamic and urge people to action. But there are three stages to consider: deliberation, decision, and execution.

  Deliberation means seeking the means that lead to the end. It is made on the basis of reflection, of advice that has been asked for, of careful examination.

  Decision means, after examining the various possible methods, make up your mind to choose one of them . . . Prudence isn’t an everlasting see-saw, suspending everything and tearing the mind apart with uncertainty; nor is it waiting in order to decide for the best. It is said that politics is the art of the possible, and in a way that is right.

  Execution is the most important of the three: prudence, linked with strength, prevents discouragement in the face of difficulties and impediments. This is the time when a man is shown to be a leader and guide.

  Thus Albino Luciani, a man totally committed to the belief that the Roman Catholic Church should be the Church of the poor, set in motion an enquiry into the wealth of the Vatican. He would deliberate, decide, then execute.

  *The only official record of what transpired is buried deep in the Vatican archives. What follows is the result of evidence I have acquired from a variety of informed sources. The figures did not always agree and consequently I fully acknowledge that there must be a margin of error. This also applies to the names of the cardinals who voted for Luciani on the first ballot. Though there will inevitably be variances I am satisfied that the general shape and pattern of voting recorded here is accurate.

  Vatican Incorporated

  When Albino Luciani became Head of the Roman Catholic Church in August 1978 he was in command of a truly unique organization. Over 800 million people, nearly one-fifth of the world’s population, looked to Luciani as their spiritual leader. Nearer to hand, within Vatican City, was the structure that controlled not only the faith, but the fiscal policy of the Church.

  ‘Vatican Incorporated’ is a vital part of this structure. It exists in bricks and mortar. It exists within certain philosophies. Paul Marcinkus of the Vatican Bank is credited with the observation that, ‘You can’t run the Church on Hail Marys’. Obviously the power of prayer has been devalued along with many of the world’s currencies in recent years.

  Marcinkus should not be condemned for what might appear to be a materialistic observation. The Church plays many roles in many countries. It needs money. How much money is a different question. What it should be doing with that money is another. That it does much that is good is beyond doubt. That it does much that is highly questionable is also beyond doubt. There is a large quantity of published works which give details of the many charities financed by the Church, of the aid it gives to famine relief, to alleviate suffering of every kind. Education, medicine, food, shelter – these are some of the benefits that derive from the work of the Church. What is lacking is information on how much is acquired and how it is acquired. On these matters the Vatican is and always has been very secretive. That secrecy has inevitably given rise to one of the world’s great unsolved mysteries. How much is the Roman Catholic Church worth?

  In mid-1970, commenting on a Swiss newspaper article which declared, ‘the productive capital of the Vatican can be reckoned at between 50 and 55 billion Swiss francs’ (a figure approaching 13 billion dollars), L’Osservatore Romano said: ‘It is a simply fantastic figure. In reality, the productive capital of the Holy See, including both Deposits and Investments placed both in Italy and outside Italy, is far from reaching one hundredth of this sum.’ That would place a ceiling figure on Vatican wealth on July 22nd, 1970, of £46 million or 111 million dollars.

  The first falsehood contained in the Vatican newspaper’s statement is the exclusion of the assets of the Vatican Bank. It is comparable to asking ICI or Du Pont for complete disclosure and being favoured with the total in the petty cash box. Even excluding the annual profits of the Vatican Bank, the figure quoted by the Vatican is an outrageous lie. It was a lie that over the years was to be heard again. In April 1975 Lamberto Furno of La Stampa asked His Eminence Cardinal Vagnozzi: ‘If I were to put forward the sum of 300 billion lire for the productive patrimony of the five administrations,* would I be close to the mark?’

  Furno was deliberately excluding the Vatican Bank in his question. He drew from Vagnozzi the assertion, ‘I tell you, the productive patrimony of the Holy See, in Italy and in the world, is less than a quarter of the sum you mention.’

  If that were true it would follow that on April 1st, 1975 the productive wealth† of the Holy See, excluding the Vatican Bank, was a figure lower than 75 billion lire or approximately 113 million dollars. One single administration, the Extraordinary Section of the Administration of the Patrimony of the Holy See, or the APSA, is treated as a central bank by the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the Bank of International Settlements at Basle. Every year the staff at Basle publish annual figures which show what the world’s central banks have deposited or borrowed from other banks in the Group of Ten. Their figures for 1975 indicate that the Vatican had 120 million dollars on deposit in foreign banks and that, uniquely, the Vatican was debtless, the only bank in the entire world to be in such a position. This was just one administration within the Vatican and to ascertain the entire actual wealth of just that one section a great many other tangible assets must be added.

  Like Rome itself, Vatican wealth was not built in a day. The problem of a wealthy Church – and all who aspire to follow the teachings of Jesus Christ must regard that wealth as a problem – has its roots as early as the fourth century. When the Roman Emperor Constantine converted to Christianity and gave colossal wealth to the then Pope, Silvester I, he created the first rich Pope. Dante ends the Inferno with the lines:

  Alas! Constantine, how much misfortune you caused,

  Not by becoming Christian, but by the dowry

  Which the first rich Father accepted from you.

  The Catholic faith’s claim to uniqueness is valid. It is the only religious organization in the world which has as its headquarters an independent State, Vatican City, which is a law unto itself. At 108.7 acres it is smaller than man
y of the world’s golf courses, is the size of St James’s Park in London and approximately one eighth the size of Central Park in New York City. A leisurely stroll right round Vatican City takes something over an hour. To count the wealth of the Vatican would take rather longer.

  The modern wealth of the Vatican is based on the generosity of Benito Mussolini. The Lateran Treaty which his government concluded with the Vatican in 1929 gave the Roman Catholic Church a variety of guarantees and measures of protection.

  The Holy See obtained recognition of itself as a Sovereign State. It was exempted from paying taxes both for its properties and its citizens, exempted from paying duty on imported goods; it had diplomatic immunity and accompanying privileges for its own diplomats and those accredited to it by foreign powers. Mussolini guaranteed the introduction of Catholic religious teaching in all State High Schools and the entire institution of marriage was placed under Canon Law, which ruled out divorce. The benefits for the Vatican were many, not least the fiscal ones.

  Article one. Italy undertakes to pay the Holy See, on the ratification of the Treaty, the sum of 750 million lire and to hand over at the same time Consolidated 5 per cent State Bonds to the bearer for the nominal value of one billion lire.