No place for corruption

Allegations that there has been corruption in the Vatican and that an official who had pulled the Vatican City finances straight was shifted aside, require forthright clarification.

As we report this week, an Italian television news programme on the La 7 network has broadcast portions of letters addressed to Pope Benedict and Vatican secretary of state Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, apparently written by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, which seem to allege corrupt practices in the awarding of Vatican tenders.

The letters suggest that Archbishop Viganò, from 2009-11 the secretary-general of the commission that governs Vatican City  and now nuncio to the United States, was moved out of the Vatican by way of an unwanted promotion, after rooting out corruption and financial mismanagement in the Vatican City administration.

In his letter to Pope Benedict of March 27, 2011, Archbishop Viganò reportedly alleged, among other instances of financial mismanagement and inflated disbursements, that “work was always given to the same companies at costs at least double compared to those charged outside the Vatican”.

Fr Federico Lombardi SJ, the Vatican’s spokesman, is an incisive communicator. His response to the TV programme, however, was not persuasive in reassuring the faithful that the Vatican’s financial management conforms to the highest standards of ethics. Indeed, the response can be described as a non-denial, notwithstanding the Vatican’s threat to take legal action against the broadcasters.

It is not good enough to attack the source of the allegation (never mind calling the allegation themselves “banal”), or to gloss over them by referring to breaches of privacy in communications, as if the content of these letters require no answer simply because they were leaked.

Fr Lombardi assures us that the principles of “correct and healthy administration and of transparency” implemented during Archbishop Viganò’s tenure continue to guide the management of the commission, and that the archbishop was not alone in seeking fiscal prudence. This is no doubt true today, but apparently was not so just a couple of years ago.

In his letter to Pope Benedict, Archbishop Viganò presciently predicted: “My transfer would provoke confusion among all those who’ve believed that it’s possible to clean up so many situations of corruption and dishonesty.” That confusion has now spread well beyond the walls of the Vatican.

The Church, from the pope to local levels, has consistently and vigorously called on governments to exercise transparency and accountability in their governance. The Vatican has a manifest obligation to not only conform to its own rhetoric, but to lead by setting the highest standards.

Catholics worldwide therefore have the right to ask for clarity on several questions:

• Were contractors overpaid or appointed because of connections, as reportedly alleged in Archbishop Viganò’s letter?
• If there was mismanagement or corrupt practices in the Vatican, what actions will be taken in regard to those responsible?
• How was the documented culture of fiscal extravagance allowed to emerge in the first place?
• Why was Archbishop Viganò transferred, against his appeals and three years ahead of the end of his contract, when his performance demonstrably helped turn around the Vatican’s finances dramatically?

The time when putting uncomfortable questions to the Vatican would be regarded as an act of impertinence is well in the past. The Vatican must now show itself to be transparent and accountable—even to the point of admitting mistakes—to maintain its moral authority, especially when the Church speaks on matters of financial ethics.

We must hope that the allegations of corrupt practices will be cleared up, and that, should these allegations have substance, appropriate action and remedy will be applied.

Anything less will fundamentally compromise the Church worldwide in its fight for the poor and against maladministration, and to give succour to those who are corrupt. And that can only harm the Church’s mission.