Authors: David Yallop
Dr Seamus Banim is a heart specialist with over twenty years’ professional experience. He is the Senior Consultant at St Bartholomew’s Hospital, London and the Nuffield Hospital. During my interview with him he said:
For a doctor, any doctor, to diagnose myocardial infarction as the cause of death is wrong. I would not be satisfied. If he had known the patient before, had treated him for a period of time, had cared for him during a previous heart attack, had observed the living man after what was to prove to be a fatal heart attack, then the diagnosis might just be permissible. But if he had not known the patient before he is not entitled to make that diagnosis. He is taking a very grave risk and he certainly would not be entitled to take such a risk and make such a diagnosis in this country. Such a diagnosis can only be given after an autopsy.
We have, therefore, an unacceptable conclusion concerning the cause of death and an equally unacceptable conclusion about the time of death.
The Vatican told the world that it happened, ‘Presumably towards eleven o’clock on the evening of September 28th’. Dr Derek Barrowcliff, a former Home Office pathologist with over fifty years’ experience, advised me:
Unless there were a graded series of temperature readings in the rectum it is a very very brave man who will say that death occurred at such and such a time. A very brave man indeed.
Rigor mortis
tends to be detectable after five or six hours depending on a number of factors including the heat of the room. A hot room brings it on quicker – a cold room slower. It may take 12 hours to develop, then remain firmly fixed for 12 hours, then start to weaken during a further 12 hours. This is very very approximate. If
rigor mortis
is present, it is reasonable to assume that death occurred some six hours or more before. Certainly a liver temperature reading [which was not taken] would have helped. If one is examining a body very very carefully in a medico-legal sense, then one does detect slight degrees of rigor. It comes on very gently. Hence if the body were stiff at 6 a.m. it would be reasonable to say death occurred at 11.00 p.m. the previous evening. But it could equally have been 9 p.m. the previous evening.
So, two facts have been indisputably established:
1 We do not know what caused the death of Albino Luciani.
2 We do not know with any degree of certainty what time he died. When Pope Paul VI died in August 1978 he was surrounded by doctors, secretaries and priests. Consider the detail contained in the official bulletin that was published and signed by doctors Mario Fontana and Renato Buzzonetti.
During the course of the past week, the Holy Father Paul VI suffered a serious accentuation of the painful symptoms referable to the arthritic illness with which he has been affected for many years. On the afternoon of Saturday 5th of August he suffered from fever due to the sudden resurgence of an acute cystitis. Having taken the opinion of Professor Fabio Prosperi, chief urologist of the United Hospitals of Rome, the appropriate curative measures were begun. During the night of 5–6 August and all through Sunday 6th of August the Holy Father was suffering from high fever. About 18.15 of Sunday 6th of August sudden, serious and progressive heightenmg of arterial pressure was observed. Now there followed rapidly the typical symptoms of insufficiency of the left ventricle with the clinical picture of acute pulmonary oedema.
Despite all the precise attentions which were at once applied, His Holiness Paul VI died at 21.40 hours.
At the time of death, the doctors in attendance indicated the following general clinical picture: cardiopathic arteriosclerotic
polyarthritis, chronic pyelonephritis and acute cystitis. Immediate cause of death: hypertensive crisis, insufficiency of the left ventricle, acute pulmonary oedema. Less than two months later, Paul’s successor dies ‘like a flower in a field that closes at night’ with not a single member of the medical profession in sight.
In contrast to the plethora of lies that poured from Vatican City about the medical history of Luciani it is worth stating the facts.
In his infancy he had shown signs of a tubercular illness, the symptoms being enlarged neck glands. At the age of eleven his tonsils were removed; at the age of fifteen his adenoids. Both these operations were performed in the general hospital in Padua. In 1945 and again in 1947 he was admitted to a sanatorium with suspected tuberculosis. Tests on both occasions produced negative results and the pulmonary illnesses were diagnosed as bronchitis. He made a complete recovery and every subsequent chest X-ray was negative. In 1964 he was operated on in April for gallstones and a blocked colon and in August for haemorrhoids. Professor Amedeo Alexandre, who performed both operations at the Pordenone hospital, checked his medical records of the period before advising me that Albino Luciani was suffering from no other ailments and that all of his pre- and post-operative medical tests confirmed that Luciani was in perfect health. These tests included X-rays and a number of ECGs, a test specifically designed to record heart abnormalities. The Professor stated that his patient’s recovery from both of these minor operations was total and complete. ‘I reexamined him in the summer after the second operation. Then too he was in excellent health.’
An illustration of how healthy Albino Luciani was can be found in the daily routine his then colleague Monsignor Taffarel described to me. It is virtually identical to his routine in Venice and subsequently in the Vatican. He awoke at 4.30 to 4.45 a.m. and retired for the night some sixteen hours later between 9 p.m. and 10 p.m. Monsignor Taffarel advised me that Luciani, apart from his many other functions, made pastoral visits to every one of his 180 parishes and was two-thirds of the way through a second round of pastoral visits when he was promoted to go to Venice. He suffered a blood clot in the central vein of the retina of the left eye in December 1975. No operation was required and his specialist Professor Rama advised me:
The treatment was only general and was based on haemokinetic medicine, anti-coagulants and mild medicines to dilate the blood vessels and, above all, a few days rest in hospital. The result was
almost immediate, with a complete recovery of vision and general recovery. He was never what one would call a ‘physical colossus’ but he was fundamentally healthy and the tests carried out on several occasions never revealed heart troubles.
Professor Rama noted that Luciani had low blood pressure which under normal conditions oscillated around 120/80. Low blood pressure was considered by the twenty-three members of the medical profession whom I consulted, to be ‘The best possible diagnosis for life expectancy.’
During his time in Venice Luciani occasionally had swelling in the ankles. His doctors thought this attributable to the low blood pressure and the need for more exercise. In July 1978 he spent ten days at the Stella Maris Institute on the Lido to counteract a possible re-occurrence of gallstones. He was put on a bland diet and took extensive walks in the morning and the evening to alleviate the slight swelling in the ankles. A medical check-up after this stay concluded that he was in excellent health. The check-up included an ECG.
The above is the sum total of Albino Luciani’s medical history during his entire life. It is based on interviews with the doctors who cared for him, relations, friends and colleagues. It should be closely compared with the farrago of lies concerning his health that poured out of Vatican City. The overriding question that surely springs immediately to mind is, why all the lies? The more one probes into Luciani’s life the greater grows the belief that this man was murdered. For nearly six years the Vatican lies concerning the late Pope have run unchecked and unchallenged. The Roman Curia would have the world believe that Albino Luciani was a simple, near idiot; a gravely ill man whose election was an aberration and whose natural death was a merciful release for the Church. In such a manner they hoped to mask murder. The past 400 years have not been: we are back with the Borgias.
While the news media of the world carried details of the Vatican fantasy about Luciani’s health, there were many who, if they had been asked, would have provided a different picture:
I knew him from 1936 onwards. Apart from the two periods of confinement for suspected tuberculosis he was perfectly healthy. He made a complete recovery after the second confinement. Certainly up to 1958 when he became Bishop of Vittorio Veneto there were no major illnesses. (Monsignor Da Rif, to author.)
His health while in Vittorio Veneto was excellent. He had the two operations in 1964 for gallstones and haemorrhoids and made a complete recovery. His work-load remained exactly the same. I have heard about the low blood pressure and the swollen legs. Neither occurred while he was here [Vittorio Veneto] and subsequently after he had gone to Venice I saw him many times. He was always in excellent health. Between 1958 and 1970 apart from those two operations his health was perfect. (Monsignor Taffarel, to author.)
In the eight years he was in Venice I only once saw Cardinal Luciani in bed because he was unwell, that was for simple influenza. For the rest, the Patriarch of Venice was very healthy and he did not suffer from any illness. (Monsignor Giuseppe Bosa, Apostolic Administrator of Venice.)
He had absolutely no cardiopathic characteristics, besides, his low blood pressure should, at least in theory, have made him safe from acute cardio-vascular attacks. The only time I needed to give him treatment was for the influenza attack. (Dr Carlo Frizzerio, Venice physician.)
Albino Luciani did not have a bad heart. Someone with a bad heart does not, as the Patriarch did every year with me from 1972 to 1977, climb mountains. We would go to Pietralba, near Bolzano, and we would climb the Corno Bianco, from 1,500 metres to 2,400 metres, at a good speed . . . There was never a sign of cardiac insufficiency. On the contrary, at my insistence in 1974 an electrocardiogram was carried out, which recorded nothing irregular. Immediately before leaving for the Conclave in August 1978 and after his visit to the Stella Maris Clinic he had a full medical check-up. The results were favourable in all respects. As for the theory of stress or exhaustion, it’s a nonsense. His working day in the Vatican was no longer than here in Venice and in the Vatican he had many more assistants, a great deal more help and goodness knows how many more advisers. Mountain men do not die of heart attacks. (Monsignor Mario Senigaglia, Secretary to Albino Luciani 1970–6, to author.)
Doctor Da Ros said to me: ‘Do you have a secret medicine? Albino Luciani is in perfect health and he is so much more
relaxed. What magic drugs do you have?’ (Father Diego Lorenzi, Secretary to Albino Luciani 1976 to his death, to author.)
All of the above plus over a further twenty people, who knew Albino Luciani from childhood onwards, confirmed that he had never smoked, he drank alcohol rarely and ate sparingly. This life style plus his low blood pressure could not be improved upon if one wished to avoid coronary disease.
Apart from the members of the medical profession already referred to who had been concerned with specific ailments, there was his regular physician Dr Giuseppe Da Ros. His relationship with Albino Luciani reveals that the Pope’s health was constantly and regularly monitored for over the last twenty years of his life.
Dr Da Ros was also a friend and in Vittorio Veneto visited Luciani every week. In Venice he came once a fortnight at 6.30 a.m. and stayed for a minimum of ninety minutes. They would breakfast together but the visits were professional as well as social.
The visits continued after Luciani’s election to the Papacy. Da Ros gave Luciani three full medical examinations during his 33-day Papacy. The last was on Saturday, September 23rd, immediately before Luciani left the Vatican for his first public engagement in Rome, meeting Mayor Argan and officially accepting the Church of St John Lateran – a public ordeal that would surely have highlighted any physical ailment from which Luciani might have been suffering. Dr Da Ros found his patient in such good health that he advised Luciani that, instead of seeing him in two weeks as planned, he would not come for three weeks. When Father Lorenzi asked the doctor about the Pope’s health on that Saturday, Dr Da Ros declared, ‘Non sta bene, ma benone’ – ‘He’s not well but very well’.
Da Ros consulted Dr Buzzonetti of the Vatican the same day and they discussed Luciani’s medical history. Obviously the Pope would eventually need a regular general practitioner based in Rome, but the doctors agreed that there was no immediate urgency. Da Ros would continue for the time being to travel down from Vittorio Veneto on a regular basis. That the doctor who had cared for him for over twenty years and the Vatican medical staff were content with an arrangement whereby the Pope’s physician resided nearly 600 kilometres from his patient is perhaps the most illuminating evidence possible. That such an arrangement was satisfactory to all leads to only two conclusions. Either that Dr Da Ros and the Vatican medical staff were guilty of the most appalling negligence and that none of them is fit to practise
medicine, or Albino Luciani was a perfectly healthy man without any illness whatsoever at the time of his death. In view of the care and attention Dr Da Ros provided, not to mention the very real affection he felt for his patient, clearly the latter conclusion must be drawn. Da Ros, you will recall, was ‘shocked, stunned and mystified’ when told of the death.