ROME – When I arrived in Rome a quarter of a century ago, I met a veteran Monsignor who had by that point worked in the Vatican for decades. And he told me a story that aptly summed up the psychology of what is loosely called. The “old guard” of this place.
The man claimed it actually happened, but frankly, the story goes like this:
When the monsignor first started working at the Vatican, he was assigned a small, dilapidated office whose only benefit was that it had a small window that partially blocked the view of St. Peter’s Square. he said. One hot day, he tried to open the window, but it was painted shut. At the time, we thought this was a perfect metaphor for the Vatican’s failure to adopt Pope John XXIII’s famous injunction to “open the windows” to let in fresh air, and the next day the Pope ordered a hammer and chisel. I brought it in and scraped the paint off. I enthusiastically opened the window.
A short time later he left for lunch. When he returns, a pigeon flies in from the square and wreaks havoc in his office, forcing the young priest to spend a chaotic afternoon cleaning up. Only then did he realize that there might be a reason why the window shutters were closed.
The moral of the story is that there is often wisdom embedded in the Vatican’s traditions, even if those charged with preserving those traditions have forgotten or never knew them in the first place, White said at the time. An old man in the mix told me. , what was the original logic?
This anecdote comes to mind when considering two major Vatican events taking place this month: the synod of bishops on synodality and the “trial of the century” for various alleged financial crimes.
In both cases, critics argue that these undertakings represent larger-scale analogues of that young priest and his chisel: hasty breaks with tradition and, in many cases, It claims to be led by people who don’t have the experience or background to evaluate it.
First, let’s talk about synods. It’s a system that’s been around since 1965, and was originally devised by Pope Paul VI as a way to expand collegiality among the world’s bishops after the end of Vatican II. Significant changes have been made this time around, including the inclusion of many voting members other than bishops.
In reality, this is a synod “with” bishops rather than a synod “of” bishops, and critics argue that this subverts the hierarchical nature of the Catholic Church and causes all the doctrinal harm they imagine. It is argued that there is a risk of setting the stage for
sotto voceSeveral people believed to be among the architects of the synod exercise, including new cardinal Victor Manuel Fernández, have already decided on the location, even though they arrived at the Vatican essentially five minutes early. , to the endless frustration of some long-time curious veterans. ear.
As for the trial, it has stalled towards its conclusion amid increasingly intense scrutiny of the lead prosecutor, Italian civil lawyer Alessandro Didi. He has no knowledge of church law or the Vatican’s own criminal law, and has been brought to court numerous times. He was accused of his ignorance of the basic realities of the Vatican.
In a way, the sniping was pretty trivial. For example, critics pounce every time Diddy gets the title of church wrong. At one point, he referred to Italy’s Cardinal Angelo Becciu, the lead defendant in the case, saying: Sua Emineza Monsignor Bec. In Vatican terminology, cardinals are not called “monsignors.”
In another widely publicized gaffe, Diddy was recorded responding, “What?” on a recording of star witness Monsignor Alberto Perlasca’s interrogation. Perlasca was referring to the former Council of Catholic Charities, Col Unum, which was suppressed by Pope Francis in 2017 as part of the reform of the Holy See.
Apart from these relatively minor issues, the defense accused Didi of more serious negligence.
Lawyers for Cecilia Marogna, a self-proclaimed security expert who advised the Vatican on the release of a Colombian nun kidnapped by Islamic extremists in Mali in 2017, say she is charged with embezzlement, but under Vatican law He pointed out that only public officials can be prosecuted. Although she would be charged with certain crimes, Marogna never had such status.
Lawyers for two former employees of the Vatican’s Financial Intelligence Service (now the Supervisory Financial Intelligence Service) similarly argued that their clients had been indicted on charges of failing to prevent payments from the State Department to Italian financiers. The appeal is based on the Vatican law that enacted the The Secretariat had no authority over the Secretary of State and therefore no ability to veto the transaction.
Overall, they say, entrusting such high-profile prosecutions to outsiders is a recipe for disaster and ultimately eviscerates any pretense of legitimacy when a verdict is handed down. Criticism has been made.
Of course, the reaction to such opposition is quite obvious.
Pope Francis is a reformer and nothing will change if we simply insist on doing things the way we have always done them. Mistakes may be made along the way, but that’s the price of progress, Pope supporters say. That is by design, even though both synods and courts will be in the hands of people who do not want to do business as usual.
On the other hand, Vatican reforms were the result of generations of English teachers telling precocious young students who complained that if poets like E.E. Cummings could break grammatical rules, they shouldn’t do it. Some argue that it is similar to what has happened. Penalties for misspellings and omitted commas. “First show that you have mastered the system,” a good teacher always says, “and then feel free to start using it.”
The Vatican is definitely Sui generis. It is not a large diocese, an NGO, a multinational corporation, or a modern nation-state, but a historically unique vehicle for the governance of the universal Church. Its identity has been protected over the centuries by a swell of laws, customs and traditions. These may seem counterintuitive or even dysfunctional to outsiders, but over time and perspective, a certain logic often becomes apparent.
The drama of both the conference and the trial is therefore, in a sense, about whether the reform agents put in charge by Pope Francis will strike the right balance between continuity and rupture, or whether, as in the story with which we began, , the pigeons come home to roost again.