Murder in the Vatican

by Lucien Gregoire

  1 Auckland Independent 30 Jan 79; in the late stages his illness was reported as ‘grave.’

  We have one more for the road.

  1 Maharashtra Times 22 Apr 78 or search Internet ‘Valerian Gracias contraception’

  2 The scene of the leader of the Polish Resistance, Boleshaw Filipiak, pleading with Karol Wojtyla, quartermaster of a German supply depot, to divert supplies to the resistance, is depicted in the 2005 CBS film starring Jon Voight, The Man Who Would Be Pope.

  3 L’Osservatore Romano 5 Jan 65

  4 Cardinal Giocomo Violardo Catholic Encyclopedia 2nd Edition

  5 L Osservatore Romano 18 Mar 78

  6 La Repubblica 20 Mar 62

  Chapter 37

  The Murder of Cardinal Suenens

  When John Paul II rose to power, he ordered a costly renovation of the retreat at Castel Gandolfo, going so far as to add a majestic swimming pool for his personal enjoyment—an about-face from his predecessor who had threatened to sell off the opulent estate.

  When he was elected, the IOR had a deficit of forty million dollars. Had it had a surplus instead of a deficit, his spending would have gone unnoticed. But, because the ‘bank’ operated at a deficit, it brought harsh criticism of the new pope’s irresponsible spending.

  Among the critics was Cardinal Suenens, “In order for one to see what has happened here, one must first understand the function of the IOR. It is not a bank at all in the common sense of the word. One can see this clearly in its title, ‘The Institute for Religious Works.’

  “The IOR is a clearing house for funds that have been raised for the poor by charitable orders of the Church. By quite a margin, its largest single client is Mother Teresa whose order ministers to the poor and dying in the slums of Calcutta and other impoverished cities of the world. It also serves as a depository for Peter’s Pence—funds raised from rich parishes to support the lavish lifestyle of the papal household. From a banking perspective, it is a depository—an account—in The Patrimony of the Holy See—the Vatican bank.

  “Because Peter’s Pence was insufficient to support the Pope’s extravagant spending, the money for his swimming pool and other improvements to the Papal Palace and the Castel Gandolfo came from funds raised by Mother Teresa and others like her intended to help children suffering from starvation and illness in the world. Also, it is not pastorally correct of His Holiness to use these funds to pay for expensive vacations at luxurious resorts reserved for the rich and famous. Also, it is morally wrong to pay Vatican cardinals huge salaries out of these same funds intended for the poor.”1

  Suenens referred to an eighteen percent pay raise for Vatican cardinals the Pope had announced immediately after his election. “It is almost as if it had been a part of the deal”2 was whispered in pubs by disgruntled Romans an Italian was not chosen.

  He was wrong about the vacations. Mother Teresa didn’t pay for them. They were paid for by his friend Licio Gelli. This is attested to in that most of them took place at the opulent Ovindoli Ski Lodge in the Italian Abruzzi region. Gelli owned the resort.3

  Bodyguards

  A few weeks after a section of a frieze fell and killed a visiting French bishop in Brussels and Cardinals Suenens and Benelli had narrowly escaped death when a chip of a frieze fell from a Vatican building, there was another incident. Suenens’ secretary threw him to the ground to avoid an onrushing car in Brussels. The hospital reported the cardinal suffered a mild concussion in the mishap.4

  There is nothing in the record to prove any of these incidents were indeed attempts on his life. Yet, it was obvious the cardinal, himself, sensed he was in danger as he was never seen again in public without two young priests who, if not for their garb, could be easily mistaken for soccer players—clearly serving as bodyguards.

  As a precaution, he moved his office from the first floor of his residence in Brussels to the third floor. An unnecessary move, as a few weeks after the last failed attempt, John Paul II removed him as Primate of Belgium. No longer with pastoral influence, Leon Joseph Suenens seemed as good as dead.

  Yet, he was not quite dead. He continued an assault from the left. Yet, with some minor exceptions concerning the rights of women in the Church, he had little success. Every now and then, he would gain notoriety, at times in Europe and, at other times, in the United States.

  In his bid for reelection, Ronald Reagan made a commitment to the Christian right leader Jerry Falwell that he would use his veto power to ban funding of AIDS research, something he did do three times during his presidency. On the campaign trail with Falwell, in a heartless remark, Reagan, citing the homosexual link to AIDS, told a television audience, “They live like that, let them die like that.”5

  From Brussels, Suenens lashed out at Reagan, ‘…Barbarian.’6

  1986, Elizabeth Taylor led celebrities in an event raising millions to establish AIDS research.7

  Suenens attended the Hollywood Bowl event. “When the Gods of Washington fail us,” he told the reporter, “we can always count on the Gods of Hollywood to bail us out.”8

  On the tenth anniversary of his friend’s death, Suenens spoke of Luciani, “Heroes are those who dream dreams and are willing to pay the price to make them come true, for you and for me.”9

  The following year, Bernardin Gantin reprimanded the bishop Jacques Gaillot for having sanctioned the union of a homosexual couple who were facing imminent death from AIDS, “The French bishop will cease advancing repulsive practices in society.”10

  Suenens criticized Gantin’s action, “I feel my duty to remind the African cardinal when Jesus said ‘Love thy neighbor as thyself,’ He meant all thy neighbors.”11 A few years later, Gantin removed Gaillot from his bishopric for preaching Liberation Theology.

  Gaillot said of his demise, “I had a dream to be able to accompany the poor, the excluded, the distressed…to be able to show my indignation at destitution, injustice and famine… without fear of the guillotine…”12

  Regardless, Suenens’ vision for the Church, his vision for the world, was so vast it would have required Vatican III to bring it about. Vatican II—the equivalent of World War II in the Church—opened the door to change, Vatican III—the equivalent of World War III in the Church—would have been required to bring it about.

  Suenens was the man, the force, behind John XXIII, Paul VI and John Paul I, the three popes of the twentieth century who allowed their conscience to overrule the evils in their scripture—the three popes of the twentieth century who had brought the elevator of human justice to the fiftieth floor of the one hundred story building of righteousness. But, it has remained there since—their successors choosing to lock it there forevermore.

  Cardinal Leon Joseph Suenens was scheduled to speak at John Carroll University in Cleveland. Disturbed, John Paul II was loading the College of Cardinals with conservatives, Suenens, who had once, together with Luciani, championed the ill-fated cause to remove the election of the Pope from the College of Cardinals to the Synod of Bishops, was about to call on the Vatican to remove the authority to appoint bishops from the Pope to the Synod of Bishops.

  A draft of the speech he never made was found in his typewriter. A housemaid innocently released it to a Sun Times reporter. “…One can see what I say here, very vividly. If, in the case of the United States, the President were allowed to appoint the members of Congress, he would then have the power of a dictator. He could load the Congress entirely with those who share his own convictions, democrats or republicans, and thereby muster the vote to render his own appointment invincible. But believe me in what I have to say here today, a plane with only one wing can fly in only one direction, and, that direction is very decidedly down!”13

  Suenens died very much as his prodigy Albino Luciani had died. American newspapers reported, “Vibrant and on the job to the end…Suenens…the Architect of Twentieth Century Catholicism…the chief negotiator of Vatican II…was found sitting up in bed wearing his reading glasses…Upright in his hands was clutched
a book…The bed lamp was on and the window next to his bed was wide open.

  The book was his own book, one he had written years before. The book was …Day by Day. It was opened to page fifty-six.

  His eyes were open and they seemed to be fixed on a phrase at the bottom of the page, ‘Let us all look around us with new eyes. A whole world of discovery will open up before us!’

  It seemed Suenens was editing his bestseller for republishing.

  In the margin of the opposite page were scribbled the words, ‘Always look forward, never look back!’”14

  The great man had left his mark in time. John XXIII, Paul VI and the little boy Albino Luciani had left their mark in time. Disciples of Lacordaire “Have an opinion and do something about it!”15

  The record is there for all time. It is there for men and women of good conscience to soak up.

  1 Le Soir Brussels 2 May 79

  2 La Stampa 2 Nov 78

  3 A Life with Karol Cardinal Stanislaw Dziwisz - IL Messaggero 23 Jan 07.

  4 La Tribune de Bruxelles 12 Dec 83

  5 CBS News 12 Sep 83 *

  6 La Tribune de Bruxelles 17 Sep 83

  7 The author’s short story The Queen of Theology in his book ‘Let’s All Get Behind the Pope’ also published as ‘The Reincarnation of Albino Luciani’ recounts Elizabeth Taylor’s struggle for AIDS

  8 Los Angeles Times 26 Mar 86

  9 Philadelphia Inquirer 29 Sep 88

  10 La Repubblica 22 Nov 88

  11 Philadelphia Inquirer 25 Nov 88

  12 Voice of the Desert Feb 95

  13 Sun Times 21 Mar 96

  14 A composite of the New York Times – Boston Globe – Cleveland Sun Times – Washington Post – 19 Mar 96. Five months after his death the Vatican cited Suenens died of thrombosis – embolism

  15 Reprinted from Albino Luciani’s book Illustrissimi 1976

  * In 2003, a documentary was censored by major television channels because it included this clip.

  Chapter 38

  “…by the grace of God.”

  “…John Paul was able to retain his papers upright in his hands by the grace of God.”

  The Vatican, October 10, 19781

  Bullshit!

  There are tens of thousands of words in ‘Murder in the Vatican.’ Whereas, alone, any one of them might lose its voice in court, I am reasonably certain, if taken en masse to the tribunal, they will stand the test of time.

  As we have demonstrated, the press is immensely more reliable than witnesses of motive who want to make him out to be whatever serves their political purposes. Yet, as it comes from different sides of the aisle, even the press can be less than reliable in determining the true cloth of a man, particularly one as controversial as this man.

  Although it is not possible to reconstruct precisely the man he truly was, hopefully, we have come close to what a pope should be.

  Likewise, the press is more reliable in the case of murder. That is, the reports as they first appear immediately following events before the clergy and fiction writers get their fingers on them. The reason references herein are mostly from the first reportings of events. You will not find Effortil, digitalis or anticoagulants in any of them.

  Yet, what we have set forth does not necessarily, in every case, prove murder. Still, most of the surviving evidence suggests murder. These people died of mysterious circumstances which have never been satisfactorily explained and the Vatican has repeatedly refused to take actions normally prudent under the laws of nations.

  In cases where murder was suspect, the Vatican repeatedly denied independent autopsy, which, in itself, could have prevented rumors. In cases where murder was apparent, the Vatican denied independent investigation which could have solved the crimes.

  In the case of the Swiss Guard murders, the Vatican had nothing to lose and everything to gain by taking Scotland Yard up on its offer to investigate the murders. Why would one not want to know who killed these three, one of which was the closest person to the sitting Pontiff. Why didn’t John Paul II overrule Cardinal Sodano and take Scotland Yard up on its offer? Why would he have not wanted to know who had murdered the most precious person to have ever come into his life? Could it be an investigation would have traced Estermann to have been the rookie guard assigned to the palace the night of John Paul’s death? One will never know.

  All we do know is he died suddenly at the age of 65 when he appeared to be, and medical records proved him to be, in exceptional health. We know one thing more. Many people wanted him dead.

  Some claim the weight of the papacy killed him.

  There have survived scores of pictures and films of his papacy. It is a rare spot in time to find a glimpse of him not smiling, laughing and joking—the reason he is remembered as the smiling pope.

  Albino Luciani was having the time of his life. One does not die of stress when one is having a good time.

  He died short of his genetic promise.

  He lost a grandmother in the 1918 flu and his other grandparents and his father lived into their eighties and nineties.2 Heart disease was not a factor in any of their deaths. 3 His mother died of cancer at 744 at a time life expectancy was twenty years short of what it is today. His full-blood siblings5 lived into their nineties, his brother dying at 91 and his sister, today in her nineties, can read this book.

  ‘Luciani was a doctrinal conservative. He didn’t care how much suffering doctrine imposed on the everyday lives of innocent people.’

  You will hear this from those who want to destroy ecclesiastical motive for murder. You will hear this from those who think there is something holy about depriving others of equal rights under the laws of nations. You will hear this from those who seek his canonization in a conservative church. For this reason his family and some others who knew him will deny anything of a controversial nature he may have said or done—particularly his compassion for homosexuals in a homophobic church—unreliable witnesses to his true testament.6

  Nothing strikes closer to the truth of the ecclesiastical Luciani than his first words to his newly acquired congregation in Venice February 8, 1970, “Today science has developed tremendously and purified our knowledge from thousands of defects in our religious knowledge of the past. Our religious knowledge has to cleanse itself of these falsehoods which science has exposed, which were not, anyway, a part of the true authentic Christian revelation—the glory of the Church will not be judged in its worship of mythical specters of the past, nor its magnificent buildings and ritual, but in its efforts to realize fraternal union among people. I mean all people.”7

  Yet, what is really important of this man is not his life on earth, not the things that are said of him, not even the lingering mystery of his death. Like any God, or for that matter, like any man, all that counts is what he left behind, “It is the inalienable right of no man to accumulate wealth beyond the necessary while other men starve to death because they have nothing.”8

  Notices in newspapers around the globe the day he was elected seemed uncoordinated. They said all kinds of things.

  Because it was part of the Associated Press release, there was a small clipping which appeared in all of the world’s newspapers.9

  Slipped into the inner pages, for the most part it went unnoticed. It had been extracted from something he had said as a cardinal two years earlier, “The Church’s real treasurers are the poor, the little ones, who should not be helped by means of mere occasional alms but by a society which insures the opportunity of each little one to make his or her fullest contribution. Charity is like sandbags placed against onrushing waters, it will never stem the tide…”10

  Charity is an excuse for compassion in a selfish society. One can amass wealth beyond one’s wildest dreams and drop one’s pennies into the poor box. Charity does not exist in a communist society.

  Albino Luciani was convinced the coalition of capitalism and charity could not work. The world had poverty written all over it.

  He would force the ri
ch to help the poor. He once told the nun Vincenza, “When I preach compassion for the poor, they call me a saint. When I do something about it, they call me a communist.”11

  Abhorred by what was taking place in the Soviet Union, he was encouraged by the success of what had already taken place in Italy which had drawn the wrath of Henry Kissinger, “I believe the advent of communism in these (Italy and Spain) European countries is likely to result in a sequence of events in which other European countries will move in the same direction… the Communist Party has emerged as an effective vehicle for developing jobs and providing education for the common people and this endangers our free capitalistic society… If communism takes hold in Italy, NATO would collapse and the United States would be dangerously isolated…”12

  Insofar as Murder in the Vatican presents compelling evidence linking prominent Italian and American statesmen to the murders of Aldo Moro, Paul VI, John Paul I and other leaders of the Marxist movement in the free world, the author reminds the reader, it was the sworn duty of these men, imposed upon them by the laws of their nations, to head off what they viewed as a dangerous slide to the left.

  Luciani was hopeful the ideology of a free democratic-communist society once established in Italy and Europe would spread across the pond to the Americas. He would demolish the driving force behind poverty in third world countries with the ‘pill.’ He would create a society based on the principle—his principle, “What is important is not how many children are born, but that every child that is born has an equal opportunity at a good and healthy life.”13

  Finish

  Whereas they do not all support my case, I have presented all the events of the time—thousands of them—in chronological order.

  It is the strategy of writers to leave most of them out and present only those that support one’s suppositions and even those out of order. It puts the reader at a disadvantage to the writer’s conclusions. Like a shell game with a thousand shells and a half-dozen peanuts, mesmerize the reader and he’ll believe most anything you tell him.