BENEDICT XVI: NEWS, PAPAL TEXTS, PHOTOS AND COMMENTARY

Back to the forum now. The federal inspection turned out to be much less gruelling than the biennial state inspections, except the feds visit your lab at random, in our case with less than 24 hours notice... The checklists on every activity in the laboratory are so exhaustive and detailed it's easy to miss documenting or mis-documenting something... So that was my emergency, and thank God it's done!

There's little to catch up on in the Anglophone media, but a lot from the Italians, starting with this comment by Vittorio Messori on a US diplomat's assessment of Benedict XVI:


The Pope and Wikileaks
Translated from

Dec. 13, 2010

In these days, our newspapers and TV newscasts are flooded with thousands of documents from Wikileaks whose latest online dump concerns correspondence between the US State Department and its embassies around the world. And the powerful United States administration has been exposed to be full of holes.

Reading these dispatches, though in rather cursory fashion, has convinced me that diplomatic reports are a hodgepodge of empty chatter, things picked up from talking to newsmen, and idle commentary without particular relevance, much of it gossip.

But I do not wish the readers of BQ to miss a 'pearl' from one of the cables sent by the US embassy to the Holy See which reads: "The Pope sometimes irritates politicians and journalists when he does what he believes best for the Church, such as the rapprochement with the Lefebvrians or considering the canonization of Pope Pius XII".

I cannot imagine a better compliment or encouragement for the Bishop of Rome, than that he is thought to do what he believes to be his duty for the good of the Church, not really caring if he 'irritates' politicians and newsmen - in other words, he does not choose to follow what is politically correct, a criterion which has characterized and united the worlds of politics and media.

(Messori's note: The text cited was picked up from news reports and not from a document that had been personally reviewed by the writer.) [What an admirable old-fashioned and now-rare disclaimer from a journalist!]


A lengthy article in BQ goes beyond all the gossip and uninformed commentary in the Wikileaks documents to summarize the positive - and generally correct - conclusions drawn by diplomats at the US embassy about Vatican positions on international affairs and the value of bishops and missionaries in reporting information from countries like China, India and Cuba. The writer is an associate professor of international relations in Rome's Marconi University.

Ignore the gossip: Vatican diplomacy
comes out well in the Wikileaks documents
by Matteo Luigi Napolitano
Translated from

Dec. 14, 2010


In the Wikileaks disclosures about the Vatican, the elements that have ended up in the media have obscured the substance of documents which give a quite different view of Vatican diplomacy.

We can only give a rapid summary of elements which have escaped media attention but which are found in the Wikileaks documents.

On July 8, 2001, the Department of State sent all US embassies a summary overview of Vatican policies. Among the many elements it highlights are some which are truly interesting [even if previously known]: the fact that the Vatican "supports development in the Third World and favors debt exemption for the poorest countries; that it opposes embargoes for humanitarian reasons; and that it favors dialog among the various religions. And in the Middle East, that the Church is definitely committed to the protection of the Holy Places, including Jerusalem.

What the document says regarding China is striking: "The Holy See has excellent sources of information on dissidents, on human rights issues, on religious freedom and on government control of the population".

If one considers the difficult relations of the US with Beijing at the time, this is not an element to be ignored. But it is the supra-national view of the Vatican that seems to fascinate the State Department: "The bishops, not to mention missionary groups independent of each other, that give the Vatican a unique perspective on events in China".

In India, considering recent anti-Christian developments there, "The Vatican, the local bishops and various missionary organizations are adn continue to be observers vigilant about human rights abuses and related developments".

Even in North Korea, Catholic aid organizations who periodically visit the country are valuable news sources, and in the Great Lakes region of Africa (between the two Congos), the Vatican supports the work of the Sant'Egidio Community, which plays "an important role in the international efforts to mediate the crisis and keeps the Vatican informed of these efforts".

In Cuba, after John Paul II's visit, the Vatican has been looking forward to when Fidel Castro will leave the scene, even if it feared that "replacing him could be worse". But in an April 2009 dispatch, the State Department notes that in the Vaticna view, better relations between Cuba and the United States could help isolate the dangerous revolutionary Hugo Chavez of Venezuela and his acolytes in Latin America.

Another Obama-era document dated June 26, 2009, notes that "the Church in Cuba is the only major institution that is independent of the government" and that the Vatican "hopes for a transition to democracy in Cuba".

Among the Church's humanitarian activities, Washington is well aware that the Vatican has been campaigning hard against human trafficking, that it opposes the death penalty and that it is not aligned with the US position in Iraq.

A Washington dispatch dated August 19, 2004, noted it was evident that the Vatican favored the entry of Turkey into the European Union provided it observes certain conditions [such as proving its respect for religious freedom]. It also notes that Cardinal Ratzinger had expressed his opposition to the cultural implications of Turkey entering the EU.

But a dispatch from the US embassy to the Vatican on December 7, 2006, says that as Pope, Benedict XVI has become no less supportive of Turkey's entry than was John Paul II.

Equally positive is the US perception of the Vatican role in the United Nations. In the August 2004 report, the State Department noted that the Vatican had been active in opposing sexual tourism especially when it involves minors; promoting more development aid to poor nations and initiatives to reform the international system of providing humanitarian aid; strengthening condemnation of anti-Semitism by the democratic nations and that the UN should issue a declaration on anti-Semitism as strong as that which has been issued by the European Organization for Security and Development. [Does the evaluation completely ignore the equally strong Vatican positions against a UN bureaucracy and a preponderance of national votes that contradict Catholic teachings on life and family issues?]

On the Vatican's relations with Zapatero Spain, on July 19, 2006, after the Pope visited Spain for the V World Encounter of Families, the US embassy at the Vatican noted that Benedict XVI "had chosen a respectful dialog with respect to the Spanish government's policies on gay marriage, divorce and abortion". {The statement was specific that in his brief meeting with Prime Minister Zapatero in Valencia, the Pope did not confront him on these policies, and also that the Vatican understood why Zapatero chose not to attend the papal Mass.] The note adds that the Pope's message at the Valencia event reaffirming the Vatican positions on life and family issues was addressed to the world and not to Spain in particular.

Other problems, in the eyes of Washington (external observers, after all), are unresolved. Such as relations between the Catholic Church and the Jews, exemplified by the latter's opposition to the beatification of Pope Pius XII.

Before the Pope's visit to the Holy Land, an embassy note in January 2009 noted that Benedict XVI is completely committed to good
Catholic-Jewish relations since these "would contribute to fighting anti-Semitism".

In view of all this, it is not surprising that the Vatican enjoys diplomatic prestige in the eyes of Washington. Before President Obama visited the Pope in the Vatican in July 2009, an embassy note on June 26, 2009, noted that "the Vatican is second only to he United States in the number of countries with which it has diplomatic relations (177 and 188, respectively)"; that L'Osservatore Romano is a friendly newspaper; and that the Vatican was particularly pleased at Obama's positions on human rights and closing down the terrorist prison in Guantanamo.

The note also informs Obama that the Pope actively promotes religious freedom on the international level and appreciates US support in this respect. Moreover, that Benedict XVI "enjoys respect even among non-Catholics and is therefore a moral megaphone that has no equal".

The note continues that the Vatican has been very explicit in favor of "protecting the most vulnerable people in the world from the damage caused by the international financial crisis" and is supportive of eliminating all nuclear arms.

On religious matters, the note says the Holy See has worked for decades to promote understanding with the Muslim world, undertaking interfaith dialog after 9/11, and especially after the Pope's Regensburg lecture.

On climate change, the US embassy notes in a January 21, 2010, dispatch that the Vatican wishes the failed Copenhagen initiatives to progress and is committed to environmental protection.

In short, the Wikileaked documents contain no surprises in general but many surprises in some details, but media reporting on it has focused only on so-called headline material without reflecting on the major points indicated by the documents.

In my humble opinion, even a superficial reading shows that the documents confirm that to the US, Vatican diplomacy enjoys a truly remarkable moral and political prestige.

But one other thing that has characterized most reporting of the Wikileaked documents is a lack of perspective. The Catholic Church is prismatic by nature - it weighs world events, reflects and talks about them with reference to two millennia of history, to the many civilizations and languages that comprise it, as many of the US documents acknowledge.

It is thus misleading to focus so much attention on idle commentary by US diplomats in these documents. What we have read so far, as Fr. Federico Lombardi pointed out, reflects the perceptions of those who wrote these documents. They are not necessarily unfounded. But scholars must realize that these are incomplete accounts that have to be judged against the complete record, as most historians or journalists ought to know.


Though I have not bothered to read each and every story about the Vatican-related Wilkileaked documents, I did comment at the start that the much-headlined Vatican 'refusal to cooperate' with the Irish government's Murphy Commission investigation - which many media outlets chose to focus on - was much ado about nothing since most of the offenses investigated took place before 2000, i.e., before the CDF was given jurisdiction over sex crimes committed by priests; and obviously, the best information about any case would come from the parish and diocese where it occurred. It turns out the Irish government thought so, too, in the leaked reports...


Wikileaks documents reveal that
Irish government decided Vatican involvement
was unnecessary in child abuse inquiry
By Deacon Nick

December 11th, 2010


One important and revealing fact contained in the leaked US diplomatic cable that has not been reported by The Guardian is the Irish Government’s conclusion that the Vatican’s involvement in the Murphy commission inquiry into child sex abuse was not necessary.

‘In the end, the Irish government decided not to press the Vatican to reply, according to Fahey’s [Irish Ambassador to Vatican] Deputy, Helena Keleher. Moreover, Keleher told Polchief the CDF [Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith] probably did not have much to add to the inquiry.’

Protect the Pope comment: This important admission in a US diplomatic cable challenges the poisonous myth made up by Peter Tatchell in the dying days of the Protest the Pope anti-Catholic campaign, and unquestioningly disseminated by the media, that the Vatican must open up its thousands of secret files on paedophile priests.

Here we have in the US cable the truth of the matter, which is that local bishops and dioceses have primary responsibility for handling allegations of child sexual abuse by clergy and not the Vatican. The CDF’s recently acquired role is to make sure that the allegations are handled promptly and correctly by the local bishop.

The CNS story on Dec. 13 by John Thavis on the Wikileaked documents on Dec. 13 led off with what the cables said about the sex abuse scandal in Ireland but did not elaborate on it until after several paragraphs detailing the usual selection of the 'headline grabbers', but I shall only post what it says on this particular topic.

Wikileaks cables show Vatican
horrified by Irish clergy's sex abuses



VATICAN CITY, Dec. 13 (AP) - A spate of U.S. diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks portray the Vatican as horrified over clerical sex abuse in Ireland but also deeply concerned that the procedures used by Irish investigators of the scandal were "an affront to Vatican sovereignty"...

The sex abuse scandal in Ireland was treated in a memo dated Feb. 26, 2010, written by Julieta Valls Noyes, the deputy chief of mission at the embassy. She wrote that the Vatican had responded relatively quickly to the revelations of sexual abuse in the Archdiocese of Dublin, in part because it had "learned key lessons" from the U.S. sex abuse scandal in 2002.

"Vatican and Irish officials' first concern was for the victims," the cable said. But that concern was sometimes overshadowed by the public perception in Ireland that the Vatican was worried about "pettily procedural" matters, it said.

Specifically, the Vatican was upset that the independent Murphy Commission that investigated the scandal had sidestepped diplomatic channels and tried to directly convene the Vatican nuncio, or ambassador, to answer questions and obtain other information from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

The Vatican complained to the Irish Embassy, saying such requests must go through diplomatic channels, and in the end the government decided not to press the Vatican to reply, the cable said. It added that contacts at the Vatican and in Ireland expected the sex abuse crisis to continue for several years, as new allegations from other Irish archdioceses come to light...