Gotti Tedeschi, the IOR, Benedict, Gaenswein. What Happened? Interview.

11 Gennaio 2023 Pubblicato da Lascia il tuo commento

Marco Tosatti

Dear friends and foes of Stilum Curiae, I offer for your attention this brief interview conducted with Prof. Ettore Gotti Tedeschi on the events related to his release from the IOR. Enjoy reading, and sharing.


Doctor Gotti Tedeschi, have you read in the advance copy of Archbishop Georg Ganswein’s new book the part that concerns you? What do you think? Does it correspond to the truth of what really happened? … But also a more specific question, about the questions discussed in the book, is a bishop of the Holy Roman Church not tied to the “pontifical secret?”


Yes, I have read only the part that refers to me. However, it does not correspond exactly to what I know happened, and I am a witness to what happened. But it is understandable, we must try to understand that Archbishop Ganswein may, after ten years of personal sufferings, have forgotten or become confused on certain facts, which for him in the end were of little relevance to him relative to the other themes that he addresses in his book. For me these facts are instead a part of my life and events that greatly affected me. It is understandable that Archbishop Ganswein may not have had time to go back and reread his unequivocal interview with Il Messaggero, and he certainly did not want to speak, out of discretion, about the confidential meeting we had in Rome at the end of November 2012. I don’t know how to respond to the question about the “pontifical secret.”


Some time ago a friend and colleague of mine who is a scholar of Islam, pointed out to me that, differently from the Muslim faith, for us Catholics the sin referred to in the 8th Commandment – you shall not bear false witness – is not a crime. So sometimes we take it a little lightly because it’s not defamation [libel]. Could you tell us, without going into details that are protected by the “pontifical secret,” what happened with regard to the vote of no confidence that the IOR Council [governing the Vatican Bank] took concerning you on May 24, 2012?

Explaining it is complex, and would require indispensable details which have also been documented with care, because after the vote of no confidence I asked several times for an investigation. In sum, the vote of no confidence was not at all linked to bad relations with the administrative counselors, with whom I had actually had excellent relations up until a couple of weeks prior to that vote. That is, before the “motion of no-confidence” that I had been forced to address to other people

In order to be able to explain the events, I would have to refer to the Anti-Laundering Law which I concurred in imposing along with Cardinal Nicora at the direction of Pope Benedict, who said to me: “We must be exemplary.” The law was signed into force by a Motu Proprio of Benedict XVI at the end of 2010. I would have to refer to the change made in this law at the end of 2011, to the consequences of the closing of IOR’s accounts by the major Italian banks (I personally received explicit written resignation from the highest leadership level of these banks, which I still have on file). And, of course, I would also have to refer to the position that is considered “rigid” that Cardinal Nicora and I are taking towards these facts. Moreover, these facts are all well-documented, since they have been under evaluation by the EU supervisory body (Moneyval). There is also a dossier of hundreds of pages about the no-confidence that I received and on the one that I was forced to write there is a dossier of hundreds of pages, which I made available for the inquiry that requested.

I also recall that on the morning of May 24 [2012], as soon as I was informed by a very high prelate that I would be given a vote of no confidence, I asked if the Holy Father was informed. I was told no, confirming the subsequent interview given by Archbishop Ganswein to Il Messaggero. After the “expulsion,” Archbishop Ganswein sent me a couple of messages, in the name of the Holy Father, via a bishop friend (who is still living) for reasons of prudence. I will always be grateful to Archbishop Ganswein for these considerations.


I seem to remember that there was some talk of reinstating you, which was announced but never carried out. What can you say about this?

At the end of November 2012, Archbishop Ganswein asked me to have a confidential meeting in Rome. Following this meeting, which I still consider confidential to today, I made a decision that was greatly appreciated by Archbishop Ganswein. After a few weeks the personal secretary of the Secretary of State, Cardinal Bertone, called me to Rome for a meeting. This meeting did not take place until February 6, 2013, and it occurred in the private residence of a cardinal. The Secretary of State was very affectionate; I remember perfectly the kind words and gestures with which he received me. He then said to me that the Holy Father had decided on my immediate reinstatement (he also told me what position I would be given, of course) and he asked me to remain available for the official announcement in the following days. (Five days later, February 11, we all know what happened…). Concerning this meeting, in addition to the eyewitnesses who were physically present, there was also “by coincidence” another prestigious eyewitness, because on the way back to the Vatican, while going through the Porta Sant’Anna, the Secretary of State met a person of great prestige with important Vatican positions and told him what had transpired. This person immediately called me and my wife to congratulate us. You see, dear Tosatti, these events are imprinted in my memory and in my heart, but I cannot pretend that it is the same for others. In addition, Archbishop Ganswein has always had the utmost attention for me and for the work that I have tried to carry out. I still have gratitude and fond memories of him.


Aiutate Stilum Curiae












Condividi i miei articoli:

Libri Marco Tosatti

Tag: , , ,


Lascia un commento