Authors: David Yallop
Luigi Ronsisvalle, although a professional murderer, baulked at accepting the contract. The fee of 100,000 dollars looked good but Ronsisvalle, with a deeper appreciation of the American way of life than Sindona, did not envisage having much opportunity to spend it. If Kenney were murdered there would be waves, big ones. Ronsisvalle began to seek someone, on behalf of the Gambino family, who fancied his chances of survival after killing a district attorney.
Sindona and his associates then turned to the next problem, Carlo Bordoni, former business associate and close friend of Sindona. Bordoni was already facing a number of charges concerning the collapse of the Franklin Bank and Sindona was aware that he could give lethal testimony against The Shark as part of a deal to reduce his own punishment. It was decided that the treatment that was about to be given to Nicola Biase and his family and attorney should be extended to Carlo Bordoni.
The remaining problems for Sindona lay in Italy, particularly within the Vatican. If Marcinkus fell, then Calvi would go. If Calvi went, then Sindona would be pulled down with him. The four-year fight to avoid extradition would be over. Might a man who considered he could solve his problems in the USA with the murder of a United States attorney feel that the major threat facing him in Italy could be eliminated by the death of a Pope?
Sindona, Calvi, Marcinkus and Cody: by September 28th, 1978 each of these men stood to lose much if Albino Luciani were to decide on specific courses of action. Others who stood to be directly affected were Licio Gelli and Umberto Ortolani: for these P2 leaders to lose
Calvi would be for the masonic lodge to lose its paymaster general. By September 28th, another name was added to the growing list of people who were about to be seriously affected by the proposed action of Luciani. The new name was that of Cardinal Jean Villot, the Pope’s Secretary of State.
The same morning, after a light breakfast of coffee, croissant and rolls, Luciani was at his desk before 8 a.m. There was much to be done.
The first problem he tackled was
L’Osservatore Romano.
In the previous month, he had been given cause to complain about the paper on numerous occasions. After the battle had been won about the regal use of ‘we’ and ‘our’, which the paper had initially insisted on substituting for the Pope’s use of the humbler first person, each day’s edition had produced further irritations for the Pope. The paper had adhered rigidly to the Curial-written speeches and ignored his own personal comments. It even complained when Italian journalists had accurately reported what the Pope had said rather than what
L’Osservatore Romano
deemed he should have said. Now there were fresh problems of a far more serious nature.
A number of Curial cardinals had discovered to their horror that shortly before the Conclave Albino Luciani had been asked for his opinion on the birth of Louise Brown, known as ‘the first test tube baby’, an English girl recently born with the aid of artificial fertilization. Luciani had been interviewed on the subject three days before the death of Pope Paul VI but his views were not generally known until the article carried in
Prospettive nel Mondo
after his election. The hardliners on birth control read with growing dismay the views of the man who was now Pope.
Luciani had begun cautiously, making it clear that what he was expressing were his own personal views, because he, like everyone else, ‘waited to hear what the authentic teaching of the Church would be when the experts had been consulted’. His surprise election had produced a situation in which the authentic teaching of the Church on this as on any other subject was now totally within Luciani’s province.
In the interview Luciani expressed qualified enthusiasm about the birth. He was concerned about the possibility of ‘baby factories’, a prophetic concern in view of current events in California where women are queueing to be impregnated with the sperm of Nobel prize winners.
On a more personal note to the parents of Louise Brown, Luciani said:
Following the example of God, who desires and loves human life, I too send my best wishes to the baby. As for her parents, I have no right to condemn them; subjectively, if they acted with good intentions and in good faith, they may even have great merit before God for what they have decided and asked the doctors to do.
He then drew attention to a previous pronouncement by Pius XII which might put the act of artificial fertilization in conflict with the Church. Then, considering the view that every individual has the right to choose for him or herself, he expressed an opinion that lay at the heart of his attitude towards many moral problems. ‘As for the individual conscience, I agree, it must always be followed, whether it commands or forbids; the individual though must seek always to develop a well-formed conscience.’
The element within the Vatican who believe that the only well-formed conscience is one formed exclusively by them began to mutter. Discreet meetings began to take place. It was clear to those who attended these meetings that Luciani had to be stopped. They talked airily of ‘the betrayal of Paul’, which to certain refined Roman minds is an elegant way of saying, ‘I disagree’.
When news of the cautious dialogue between the Secretariat of State’s office and the US State Department began to leak to this group they determined on action. The subsequent information that a delegation of officials concerned with birth control had been granted an audience with the Pope gave added urgency to those within the Vatican who considered
Humanae Vitae
should remain the last word on this subject.
On September 27th there appeared on the front page of
L’Osservatore Romano
a long article entitled
‘Humanae Vitae
and Catholic morality’. It was written by Cardinal Luigi Ciappi, OP, theologian to the Papal household. Cardinal Ciappi had been personal theologian to Paul VI and Pius XII. Coming from such an authority, the article would appear to carry the personal imprimatur of the new Pope. It had previously been published in
Laterano
to ‘celebrate’ the tenth anniversary of
Humanae Vitae.
Its re-publication was a deliberate attempt to forestall any change on the issue of birth control that Albino Luciani might wish to make. The article is a long eulogy extolling the virtues of
Humanae Vitae.
There are copious quotations from Paul VI, but from Luciani not a single word affirming he shared either Paul’s or Ciappi’s views. The reason for that is simple. Ciappi
had not discussed the article with Luciani. Indeed as of September 27th, 1978, Cardinal Ciappi was still awaiting a private audience with the new Pope. The first Luciani knew of the article and the views it contained was when he read it in the paper on September 27th. With rising anger he turned to page two to continue reading the article; it was, as previously noted, very long. On page two he was confronted with yet another of the Curia’s efforts to undermine his position. Running over three entire columns was another article entitled ‘The Risk of Manipulation in the Creation of Life’. This was a blunt, dogmatic condemnation of the birth of test tube baby Louise Brown and of all artificial fertilization.
Again there had been no reference to Luciani. The Curia knew full well that, for all
L’Osservatore Romano
claims to be only semiofficial, such an article would be clearly seen by the world as being the views of the new Pope. The battle was well and truly joined.
On September 28th, therefore, shortly after 8.00 a.m., the Pope telephoned his Secretary of State, Villot. He demanded a full explanation of how the two articles had appeared; then he phoned Cardinal Felici in Padua where he was about to attend a spiritual retreat.
He had taken to using Felici more and more as a sounding board for his ideas. Aware that their views differed on a large range of subjects, Luciani was equally aware that Felici would respond with total honesty. The Pope also knew that, as Dean of the Sacred College, few knew their way through the machinations of the Curia better than Felici.
Luciani expressed his anger at the two articles. ‘You recall some days ago advising me that the Curia wished me to restrain my natural exuberance?’
‘It was merely a suggestion, Holiness.’
‘Perhaps you would be kind enough to return the compliment on my behalf. Tell that little newspaper to restrain its views on such issues. Editors are like Popes. Neither is indispensable.’
After arranging to meet Felici upon his return from Padua, Luciani moved on to the next problem, the Dutch Church. Five of the seven Dutch bishops were planning to take moderate positions on the issues of abortion, homosexuality and the employment of married priests. The five included Cardinal Willebrands, the man who had offered words of comfort to Luciani during the Conclave. The five were opposed by two extremely conservative bishops, Gijsens of Roermond and Simonis of Rotterdam. A meeting in The Netherlands in
November 1978 promised to be the battle arena that would expose the deep divisions to the Dutch public. There was a further problem, which was covered in the detailed report that had been submitted to the late Pope, Paul VI.
The Jesuits were in pursuit of the world famous theologian and Dominican Professor, Edward Schillebeeckx. As with his Swiss contemporary, Hans Kung, the conservatives wished to silence what seemed to them to be the radical ideas of Schillebeeckx. The feared Index of banned and prohibited books had been abolished by Paul VI. His death had left unresolved the problem of how the Roman Catholic Church would control its forward thinkers. In the past Luciani had borrowed a phrase from Kung to condemn ‘sniper theologians’ but men such as Kung and Schillebeeckx were not sniping; they articulated a deep desire to return the Church to its origins, something of which Albino Luciani wholeheartedly approved. At a few minutes to ten, Luciani placed the report to one side and immersed himself in happier aspects of his job. A series of audiences.
First to be received was a group which included the man whom Luciani had promoted to the Presidency of Cor Unum, Cardinal Bernardin Gantin. The Pope beamed at the strong, youthful figure of Gantin, who for him represented the Church’s future. During their conversation, Luciani remarked: ‘It is only Jesus Christ whom we must present to the world. Apart from this we would have no reason, no purpose, we would never be listened to.’
Another who was granted an audience that morning was Henri de Riedmatten. When the news had flown around Rome shortly after the Conclave that Luciani had written to Pope Paul before
Humanae Vitae,
urging him not to reaffirm the ban on artificial contraception, it had been Riedmatten who called such a report ‘a total fantasy’. His discussion with the Pope on September 28th concerned his work as secretary of Cor Unum but Luciani gave Riedmatten a clear warning against any further ‘denials’.
‘I understand that my report on birth control passed you by?’
Riedmatten mumbled something about possible confusion.
‘One should take care, Father Riedmatten, not to speak publicly until all confusion has cleared. Should you need a copy of my report I’m sure it can be found for you.’
Riedmatten thanked the Pope profusely. Thereafter he maintained a wise silence while Luciani discussed the problems of Lebanon with Cardinal Gantin. He advised Gantin that the previous day he had discussed his projected visit to the Lebanon with Patriarch Hakim
whose Greek Melkite-rite dioceses covered not only the invaded Lebanon but the invading Syria.
Also received in audience that morning was a group of bishops from the Philippines who were making their
ad limina
visit. Confronted with men who had to contend with the day-to-day reality of President Marcos, Luciani talked to them on a subject very close to his heart: evangelization. Aware of the difficulties facing these men if he spoke out directly about Marcos, the Pope chose instead to make his points through urging the importance of evangelization. He reminded them of Pope Paul’s trip to the Philippines.
At a moment when he chose to speak about the poor, about justice and peace, about human rights, about economic and social liberation, at a moment when he also effectively committed the Church to the alleviation of misery, he did not and could not remain silent about the ‘higher good’, the fullness of life in the Kingdom of Heaven.
The message was clearly understood, not only by the bishops, but subsequently also by the Marcos family.
After the morning audiences Luciani had a meeting with Cardinal Baggio. He had arrived at a number of decisions and was now about to impart two of them to Baggio.
The first was the problem of Cardinal John Cody of Chicago. After weighing every consideration Luciani had decided that Cody must be removed. It was to be done in a classic Vatican manner, he hoped without undue publicity. He told Baggio that Cody was to be given the opportunity to resign because of ill health. There should be little adverse Press comment about this because Cody’s health was indeed far from good. If Cody declined to resign, rather than suffer the uproar of publicly removing him against his will a co-adjutor was to be appointed. Another bishop would be brought in to take over all effective power and to run the diocese. Luciani felt sure that faced with the alternative, Cody would choose to go with dignity. If he insisted upon staying then so be it. He would be relieved of all responsibility. Luciani was crystal clear on all of this. There was to be no asking, no request. A co-adjutor would be appointed.
Baggio was delighted; finally the situation had been resolved. He was less than pleased with the next decision at which Luciani had arrived. Venice was without a Patriarch. Baggio was offered the job.