One of the “Ravens” is a cardinal, another is a woman, five cardinals have been questioned, envelopes with documents found already addressed to their recipients.
All of this has been denied, but there it is: for a day or a week it makes the headlines.
Just like the ever-present anonymous Monsignor who claims to be a “raven” and who claims to hand over the Pope’s personal letters and other documents for the love of the Pope and the Church.
And the equally inevitable interjection of Hans Kung who claims that everything that is happening is caused by a lack of renewal resulting in the “crisis of an entire system as a whole.”
And everything else is dragged out of the closet and added to the mix for good measure: from the IOR to the story of Emanuela Orlandi, the Masonic gangs in the Vatican. While the investigation, the real one, pushes ahead.
By now they call it “Vaticanleaks”: it is the story, which first exploded on May 23, of the documents stolen by Paolo Gabriele, “auitante di camera”, ie personal servant, to Benedict XVI, who felt the necessity to personally intervene to denounce the “gratuitous allegation ” that are emerging in the press, depicting “an image of the Holy See, which does not correspond to reality” and confirm his faith in his “closest collaborators”.
It was the turn of Father Federico Lombardi, director of the Vatican Press Office, asking reporters to “maintain their calm” and cultivate “a sense of balance” in describing the facts “to avoid giving rise to speculation.”
The Pope also expressed his “sorrow” for what happened and confirmed his “firm conviction” that God “will never fail to give His aid in sustaining the Church on her journey”.
In recent days, Father Lombardi spoke of “a challenging test for the Pope and the Roman Curia” and Msgr. Angelo Becciu, Substitute Secretary of State, spoke of a “saddened” Pope.
Because, he said in an interview with L’Osservatore Romano, “given what it has been possible to find out so far, someone close to him seems to be responsible for conduct that is unjustifiable from every point of view.
Of course, sorrow for the person involved is what the Pope feels most deeply.
Yet the fact remains that he suffered a brutal act: Benedict XVI saw published papers stolen from his house, letters that were not merely private correspondence but indeed information, reflections, expressions of conscience and even outbursts which he only received by virtue of his ministry.
For this reason the Pontiff is particularly sorrowful and also because of the violence suffered by those who wrote these letters or writings addressed to him. “
For Msgr. Becciu, “the publication of the stolen letters ” is ” Above all, I repeat, because it was not only a violation, already very serious in itself, of the confidentiality to which anyone would be entitled, as rather a vile offence to the relationship of trust between Benedict XVI and anyone who turns to him even to express, in conscience, protests. Let us reason: the Pope was not merely robbed of letters. Violence has been done to the consciences of those who turn to him as Vicar of Christ, an assault has been made on the ministry of the Successor of the Apostle Peter. In many of the documents published we find ourselves in a context we presume to be of total trust. When a Catholic speaks to the Roman Pontiff, he is duty bound to open himself as if he were before God, partly because he feels that he is guaranteed absolute confidentiality.”
These are the reasons for which, he says, “on the part of journalists, that in addition to their duty to explain what is happening, there should be an ethical shock, namely, the courage to take a clear step back from the initiative of a colleague whom I do not hesitate to call criminal. “The truth will set you free”: this is the transparency that does good not only to the Church but also to the world of information”.
The fact remains that we seem to be dealing with a Dan Brown syndrome. When, as in all things human, there are problems, all efforts are made to write about the Vatican creating an aura of mystery and conspiracy, even where there is not one. For example, last Saturday, the Pope received the pilgrims of the Renewal in the Holy Spirit.
On the eve of Pentecost, it was a given that he would speak to them about the Holy Spirit, yet some media were able to find references in his speech to the vultures. Everything is forced, all attempts possible are made to involve the Church in an affair which then could be just another sordid story of money, for all we know so far. But finding conspiracy theories everywhere is nothing new.
Neither is there anything new in the claim of those who publish the Pope’s private documents, thus damaging the Pope, that they are doing it for his own good.
In the long run, it always ends the same way: someone has already asked for Benedict XVI’s resignation. They love him so much they want him to leave.