Ratzinger was afraid (Adagio), page 17
Notes
69 Benedict XVI (with Seewald, Peter): Light of the World: The Pope, The Church and the Signs Of The Times, Vatican City: Liberia Editrice Vaticana, 2010.
70 Andrea Tornielli wrote on the Vaticaninsider.it website on August 31, 2011: “Anonymous letters are neither a new phenomenon nor a rare in the Vatican. There are many around, often carrying accusations that are ignominious but also unfounded, or at least not proven. They are used to discredit prelates, to block their careers. So it should not be a big surprise that in the past days one has been doing the rounds containing serious allegations and a menacing sentence against Secretary of State Tarcisio Bertone, Benedict XVI’s right-hand man. The letter starts with an ominous quote from Don Giovanni Bosco, founder of the Salesians, the congregation Bertone belongs to: “Big funerals at the court!” which was how the Turinese saint used to address King Victor Emanuel II, telling him someone would die if the Piedmontese kingdom continued its policy of seizing assets from the Church”. The anonymous author of the letter against Bertone appeared very well-informed about Curia affairs, and accused the Cardinal of being a poor decision-maker and of choosing his appointments on the basis of personal sympathies. And it referred specifically to his decision to dismiss Carlo Maria Viganò.
71 A curious fact, at least for a senior member of the Church: Calcagno is an avid arms collector. Basing itself on police records from 2006, the il Fatto Quotidiano newspaper wrote on April 11, 2012 that the Cardinal’s arsenal included: a Breda rifle, Argus model; a Schmidt musket mod. 31; a Faet Carcano rifle similar to the one presumably used to shoot Kennedy; a Russian-made Nagant rifle; a Turkish Hatsan rifle; a .22 Beretta carbine for sport; a double-barrelled .12 Gamba shotgun; another .12 double-barrelled shotgun; a Franchi .12 double-barrelled shotgun; a Smith & Wesson 357 magnum revolver, like the one used by Clint Eastwood in his Inspector Callaghan movies; and a Remington 7400 semi-automatic.
72 Maltese, Curzio: I conti della Chiesa, “La Repubblica”, September 28, 2007.
73 The letter expressed the reservations against the Pope’s right-hand man of the so-called “diplomats,” the bloc of Cardinals with a diplomatic background.
74 The name of this economist who was meant to give an expert advice on the encyclical is not known. Presumably the text had been sent to one of two Catholic bankers: Pellegrino Capaldo or Ettore Gotti Tedeschi.
75 Tornielli, Andrea: I 77 anni del cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, Vaticaninsider.it, December 2, 2011.
76 The Toniolo Institute for Superior Studies was founded on February 6, 1920, with the objective of creating a new university, as stated in its statute. The Catholic University of the Sacred Heart was inaugurated a few months later. Its first two faculties – which still exist today – were one for philosophical-religious studies and another one for law and economics. It is run by an 11-member permanent committee and a 5-member board.
77 Bertone’s letter thus continued: “It will be up to Prof. Flick to propose the inclusion of new members in the Toniolo Institute, nominating in particular the next pro-tempore Archbishop of Milan and a prelate proposed by the Holy See. In anticipation of the indicated turnover, this Secretariat of State has already informed Prof. Flick and secured his agreement. There is no need for me to dwell on the ethical and professional qualities of this illustrious figure, a graduate from the Cattolica, who is now best placed to take over this new responsibility since he has no other assignments”.
78 “Moreover, I note that the reference to 'past practice from the early years of the Institute’ according to which the Secretariat of State nominated the president does not seem to have any historical basis. The allusion to a 'two-year’ term of office, which also has no foundation, and my protracted time in office are the only motivations offered to immediately induce me to resign […] until the nomination of the new President, namely Prof. Flick. Incidentally, I take note that the candidate – on whose profile there are more than a few perplexities – has surprisingly been already informed by the Secretariat of State”.
79 Tettamanzi’s letter continued thus: “One of the clear objectives I was given when I was made President, along with renewing the Institute’s management, getting rid of a clientelistic and parasitical management style, and refocusing the Institute towards its original objectives, was to bring the University’s teaching and research more in line with the path of the Italian Church, overcoming the resistances – not always lofty ones – coming from some quarters connected to the Holy See (By the way, I will not hide from you that behind the ongoing slander operation there are interests which are far from holy and questionable figures from the previous management). Your predecessor, God’s Servant John Paul II, not only confirmed these intentions in the personal audience he granted me on May 24, 2004, but also, in a handwritten letter that I attach, further strengthened my role by making me a representative of the Holy See and firmly urged me – a telltale sign of the hardships I was expected to face in my work – to personally refer to him on the most important issues that may come up in the running of the Institute. In the last year the Toniolo Institute was subjected to slanderous attacks, even from the media, on account of alleged and unproven administrative and managerial shortcomings, labeled as mala gestio. Nothing of the sort! There is concrete evidence that in recent years the main objective of the Toniolo Institute – to which I dedicated considerable time and energy – was to 'give’ back the Cattolica to Italian Catholics. An in-depth reflection on the mission of the Institute put an end to a long period of public irrelevance, a pathological concentration of powers and a complete lack of transparency on how resources were being used. Today the clear identity of the Toniolo has been restored: it is at the service of the University and of the Church, and its role has been brought in line with that of the major university foundations in the country. This new model, made possible also by replacing the director in 2007, has allowed the creation of a scholarship programme to support the access to the University of worthy students from all over Italy (over 200 students benefitted from them over the past three years after passing a regular concours, while the previous decade there had been no more than a dozen!). We also settled some legal issues that had been irresponsibly left pending for years”.
80 Tettamanzi also said: “Moreover, I reconfirm my fullest and immediate readiness to inform Your Holiness about the work carried out in these years and the projects for the future, to produce detailed documentation on the claims I made, and to accept pleno corde any indication and decision from you on the matter and to quickly make myself available, if you were to deem it opportune, for a personal audience. According to the statute, I still have to serve two years of my term: leading the Toniolo Institute is no easy task and continuing the work would mean not giving up before a strenuous task and before lingering resistances; however, the time remaining would allow to complete and consolidate the ongoing action of renewal and relaunch, which has produced some first remarkable results. This does not mean that once my successor is appointed and management posts wisely renewed, and above all after a full report to you followed by your counsel, it would not be possible to start the institutional procedure to find a new president. My availability, I insist, remains full and well- disposed. I do not care for the position, what I want is to fulfil the task assigned to me and leave an institution in the best possible condition, ready to serve not personal or partisan interests, but the Cattolica, the Italian and Universal Church, and young people especially, who represent its promising future”.
9. Communion and Liberation, the Legionaries of Christ, and the Lefebvrists
Communion and Liberation acts against the leftist Curia in Milan
The Church has increasingly relied on Opus Dei, Communion and Liberation, the Focolare Movement, the Legionaries of Christ and many other religious groups to mobilize its followers. However, the picture changed under Ratzinger: while the Opus Dei consolidated its influence, as of its members were installed in key Vatican positions, such as Gotti Tedeschi at the IOR presidency, other organizations where hit by scandals and risked jeopardizing their future existence. The Legionaries of Christ were put under administration following the paedophilia accusations against its disgraced founder Marcial Maciel. Several members of Communion and Liberation (CL) were embroiled in corruption and graft investigations in Italy, such as Lombardy President Roberto Formigoni, who was revealed to be a friend of a lobbyist, Pierangelo Daccò, involved in the bankruptcy of the San Raffaele hospital in Milan.
Documents show that CL had influence over Benedict XVI. In particular, two unpublished memos from 2011 are highly relevant. In the first, Don Julián Carrón, the CL leader who had succeeded Don Giussani, pleaded with the Pope to promote Cardinal Angelo Scola from the Patriarchate of Venice to the Archbishopric of Milan. His recommendation was surprisingly direct: “The only candidate that I feel in my conscience I can submit to the attention of the Holy Father is the Patriarch of Venice, Cardinal Angelo Scola,” Carrón wrote in March 2011. A few months passed by, and Carrón got what he wanted: the Pontiff chose Scola for the post.
Benedict XVI had asked for advice from the leader of CL through Cardinal Giuseppe Bertello, the current head of the Governorate, who at the time was the Vatican's Nuncio to Italy. The Pope knew Carrón well: the Spanish prelate was the ecclesiastical councillor for Memores Domini, the association preaching chastity, poverty and absolute obedience which the laywomen working in the Papal Apartments belonged to.
Carrón used arguments that were sure to play well with the Pope, arguments that led to only one conclusion: Scola had to be sent to Milan to bring the local Curia back under the control of the Holy See, and correct its centre-left slant. The leader of CL stressed “the need and the urgency of a significant break with the approach of the last thirty years, given the weight and the influence the Archdiocese of Milan has on all of Lombardy, on Italy and the world.” His was an all-out attack on the Milan Curia.
The first important fact is the profound crisis of faith of the People of God, in particular of the Ambrosian tradition. […] In the last thirty years we have seen a rupture in this tradition, accepting on principle and promoting in fact the characteristic fracture of modernity between knowledge and faith, to the detriment of the organic unity of the Christian experience, reduced to intimism and moralism. The great crisis of vocations continues, and it is approached almost as an entirely organizational issue. The creation of pastoral units has sown great dismay and sorrow among a large section of the clergy and great bewilderment among believers, as they struggle to reconcile themselves with so many priestly figures of reference.81
But it was not just a question of doctrine and vocations. Carrón strongly criticized the legacy of Cardinal Martini and the Ambrosian ritual. The Church of the Diocese of Milan, he claimed, had over the last thirty years developed “alternative magisterium” to that of the Holy Father and of the Vatican. It had to be brought back in line. Carrón went further and lashed at those in the Milan Curia who, hinting at CL, had pointed their fingers at Catholic movements engaged in “wheeler-dealing.” It is worth remarking that Carrón was writing in March 2011, well before the San Raffaele scandal had erupted and before charges of criminal conduct or questionable moral behaviour had been levelled against CL members in the regional government of Lombardy.
Theological instruction for future priests and for laity, with notable exceptions, moves away on many points from tradition and the magisterium, above all in Biblical studies and systematic theology. A sort of “alternative magisterium” to Rome and the Holy Father is often theorized, which risks becoming a consolidated feature of what it means to be “Ambrosian” today. Movements are tolerated, but they are always considered a problem, rather than a resource. A sociological reading still prevails, in the style of the Seventies, as if they were a “parallel Church,” despite the fact that they supply, for instance, hundreds of catechists, replacing in many parishes the spent force of the Azione Cattolica. Often, the many educational, social, charitable initiatives pursued by lay people are viewed with suspicion and labelled as “wheeler-dealing,” even if there are instances when these initiatives – which try to find new ways to put in practice the principles of solidarity and subsidiarity, continuing the century-old tradition of activism of Ambrosian Catholicism – are praised at first.
Politics, however, was perhaps the most critical issue. Carrón suggested that the Milanese Church had grown too close to the centre-left, accusing Cardinal Tettamanzi and the Curia of privileging relations with the Democratic Party and its allies, while neglecting Catholics “with very high responsibilities in the local administration.” Formigoni's name was not mentioned, but the reference seemed obvious.
From the point of view of the Church's presence in civil society, we cannot help noticing a certain unilateralism of interventions on social justice, at the expense of other fundamental themes of social doctrine, and a rather subtle but systematic sponsorship, especially from the Curia, of one political faction (the centre-left), while neglecting, if not opposing, the efforts of Catholics engaged in politics, sometimes with very high responsibilities in the local administration, who belong to other factions. Such de facto partisanship, although well dissimulated by a theoretical (rightful in itself) profession of indifference towards party politics, ends up weakening the Church's educational contribution to the common good, to the unity of the people and to peaceful coexistence. This is even more serious in a city, in a region (Lombardy) and in a part of Italy (the North) where isolationist tendencies are stronger and the conflicts among the powers of the State are constant and dramatic. [...]82 We should not neglect, either, the peculiarity of the presence of the Catholic University in Milan, which, despite the admirable efforts of the current Dean and of the Ecclesiastical assistant, is going through such a serious identity crisis that it may shortly, significantly and irreversibly, lose its original reason to be. Considering the prerogatives of the Holy See and of the Episcopal Conference, the contribution that a new Bishop could offer, with his knowledge and awareness, would not be inconspicuous, in terms of giving the University of all Italian Catholics a firmer cultural and educational profile. […] Given the seriousness of the situation, I do not think we could rely on a second-rate personality or on a so-called “outsider,” who would inevitably be, due to inexperience, overwhelmed by the established machine of the local Curia. We need a personality with a strong faith profile, with personal and governance skills, who could really start a new era.
The Pope at the Meeting of Communion and Liberation for the first time in 30 years
Scola was known to be close to CL, so Carrón wanted to dismiss the impression that by recommending him he was trying to score points for his movement. So he concluded his letter with a qualification that seemed perhaps superfluous:
With my suggestion, I do not want to favour the bond of friendship and the closeness of the Patriarch to the Communion and Liberation movement, but rather highlight a personality of great prestige and experience, who, in very matters of very delicate governance, has shown the strength and clarity of his faith, great energy in his pastoral activities, great open-mindedness in relation to civil society and, most of all, a genuine paternal and sympathetic approach towards all ecclesiastic experiences. And his age – Scola turned 70 in 2011 – does not seem to be an issue. On the contrary, it is an advantage rather than a “handicap:” he will be able to act for several years with great freedom, opening new paths that others will follow.
Scola proved himself to be a strong figure. In June, when the Pope acted on Carrón's advice, the new Archbishop distanced himself from Formigoni, saying that he had nothing to do with the President of Lombardy, and declaring: “I have not attended the meetings of Communion and Liberation for twenty years, and I do not know anybody there who is younger than 60.”
There was another important step marking Communion and Liberation's increased power and influence in the Vatican. On December 5, 2011, during his weekly Monday audience with the Pope, Bertone presented to Ratzinger an invitation he had received a few days earlier, on November 23. It came from Professor Emilia Guarnieri, President of the Meeting of Rimini (CL's annual conference), asking Ratzinger to speak at the 2012 edition of the Meeting, scheduled in August. Bertone was therefore acting on CL's behalf. He cited the two anniversaries that Guarnieri had pointed out to him in her letter:
Most Reverend Eminence,
From the very beginning of this pontificate we have wished in our hearts that the Holy Father could take part in the Meeting. His multiple engagements, his travels, the World Youth Day events, have always led us to shy away from asking, but in this moment there are several converging factors pushing us to do so. In 1982 we had the historic visit to the Meeting by the Blessed John Paul II. That same year, the brotherhood of Communion and Liberation won papal recognition. Therefore, 2012 will be for us a remarkable double anniversary, and a particularly evocative occasion to welcome the Holy Father. Furthermore, Eminence, I cannot help confess that when I had the honour of having a brief meeting with the Holy Father on June 19 he welcomed me with these words: “We have not seen each other for a long time! Are you still working for the Meeting?” The Holy Father clearly remembered the yearly encounters that, since taking part in the 1990 Meeting, he would kindly grant to us: each year we would present to him the theme we had chosen, we would gratefully listen to his considerations and comments, and – less discreetly than we have been in recent years – we would take the liberty to renew our invitation. We dare to hope that this year's theme - “By nature, man is relation to the infinite” - could interest the Holy Father. If this were to be the case, Eminence, we would be truly delighted, not primarily because of the invitation that, through your benevolence, we are addressing to the Holy Father, but mainly because we would be confirmed in our desire to serve, also through the Meeting, the concerns and the teachings of our great Pope. […] I am at your complete disposal as to give any further news or information that could help this wish which, in an upcoming pilgrimage, I will entrust to our Lady of Fatima, with prayers, Eminence, that I will dare address to Mary for you and the Holy Father. With devotion, Prof. Emilia Guarnieri.
