"THE HOLY SEAT" IS VACANT

The news of the abdication of Pope Benedict XVI spread like wildfire around the world, leaving many people shocked and bewildered. This is an important event for the whole of mankind because the Holy See in the form of the Roman Catholic Church continues to influence the situation in the world even in the 21st century. It should also be noted that there has not been an abdication from the throne for 600 years. The last time the head of the Roman Catholic Church quit his post was in 1415. That was Gregory XI. In his message the Pope explained his departure by his advanced age and loss of physical and spiritual strength. Piquancy is added to the situation by the fact that for Catholics now is the time of Lent, and on 31 March the Catholic world will be celebrating Easter. The question arises: will the cardinals be able to elect a Pope before that day? It is hard to imagine such an important festival being celebrated without the pontiff. 

The head of the Vatican's press service, Federico Lombardi, ruled out depression or doubts of a theological nature as a possible motive for the abdication and also rejected the idea that some kind of illness - physical or psychological - might have been the reason for his action. And indeed, the Pope has not been complaining about his health, but said that he is unable to fulfil the tasks facing the Catholic Church.

In this context the question of the reasons influencing the taking of such an important - one might say unprecedented - decision becomes very topical. The absolute theocratic nature of power in the Vatican, which separates it from other state institutions, is evident in its somewhat sacred nature where everything rests on the figure of the Pope, who is at the same time a bishop of Rome, a secular monarch and the sovereign of the city-state of the Vatican.

The Pope also runs the Institute of Religious Affairs, i.e. the Vatican Bank, whose assets are estimated at 6bn euros, and itself is, essentially, an offshore bank.

In order to understand the reasons for what has happened let us analyse the spiritual-political and financial processes which influenced the abdication of Pope Benedict XVI.

The spiritual-political aspect

When Joseph Ratzinger became Pope Benedict XVI he tried to concentrate on restoring the Vatican's former influence, especially in Europe. He believed that attempts were being made to downgrade the role of faith in public life, and he fought against this, against abortion, homosexuality and feminism. However, this was clearly the Pope's sense of tradition and no-one had the mind to hide this.

A person of strict views, an ingrained feature of Benedict XVI's papacy, be it for good or bad, was an ardent resistance to the changes taking place in the world. But fate played an evil trick on him. There was a rash of articles in the world's media about cases of paedophilia by church ministers. Particular stress was laid on the fact that during Pope Ratzinger's time as a cardinal he headed a commission to investigate such crimes. Unlike the previous Pope John Paul II, a general favourite of the western world, who kept quiet about cases of paedophilia, Benedict XVI admitted that such facts existed within the walls of the Church, met the victims who were subsequently paid millions of dollars in compensation, asked their forgiveness for the sins of the priests and promised to hand over the culprits to secular justice. But still he was accused of "insufficient criticism". It may be definitely established that the media, supported by neo-liberal circles in Europe, played a major part in helping to destroy the image of the Catholic Church.

It is on record that in 2011 an appeal was made to the Pope on behalf of hundreds of fairly influential German Catholic politicians, theologians and priests urging him to abolish the vow of celibacy, permit the ordination of women and grant lay people the right to elect the heads of church communities themselves. But the pontiff did not support this initiative.

In this context one should recall the adoption of laws in France and Great Britain on the legalization of single-sex marriages, as well as the permission given to sexual minorities in single-sex marriages to foster children. These laws were passed despite widespread protests, and some analysts consider the marriage of sexual minorities an attack on religion and name it as one of the reasons which could have led to the Pope's abdication. Of significance in this connection is a comment by the French President Francois Hollande on the Pope's abdication, when he said, without attempting to hide his joy: "The republic welcomes a Pope who takes such a decision." It will be recalled that it was Hollande himself who initiated the draft bill on legalization in France - one of the biggest Catholic countries in the world - of marriage between homosexuals.

The Pope's departure was also "celebrated" in their own way by members of the marginal feminist organization Femen which, according to unconfirmed reports in the western press, is sponsored by the billionaire Liberal George Soros. Topless and shouting "Pope No More!" in English, and ostentatiously wearing slogans on their bodies reading "No to homophobia", "A crisis of faith" and "Bye, bye, Benedict!", this time the members of Femen attacked the innocent bells of Notre Dame Cathedral which were only just protected from the blows of the women's sticks.

As far as Benedict XVI's political activities are concerned, these, too were not without confusion and scandal. Eighteen months after his election Benedict XVI, during a lecture in Regensburg, quoted the Byzantine Emperor Manuel II, who accused Muslims of spreading Islam by force. As one would expect, the Islamic world reacted instantly and stormily to the Pope's speech, demanding an apology. Despite an official apology from the Vatican, the dissatisfaction increased until Benedict XVI's visit to Turkey where he became the first Pope in history to pray in a mosque along with a Muslim imam.

Also, during a speech to mark the Holocaust, Joseph Ratzinger said that it was not only the Germans who were guilty of the genocide of the Jewish people, which caused if not as stormy reaction as in Regensburg, nevertheless a significant one.

The Pope was reminded of his years in the Hitler Youth and the fact that he tried to canonize Pope Pius XII, who had been accused of conniving with the deportation of Italian Jews in 1943 and, to put it mildly, of favouring fascism, which was disguised as the Vatican's neutrality during the Second World War. And in 2009 Benedict brought back to the Church four previously excommunicated archbishops, one of whom, Richard Williamson, denied the Holocaust. All these facts could not but affect the mutual relations between the papacy and world Jewry.

However, to accuse Benedict XVI of anti-Semitism would, perhaps, be going too far: one need only look at those whom he chose as his advisors on international affairs.  These were two well-known neo-conservatives of Jewish origin from former US President George Bush's administration - Paul Wolfowitz and Henry Kissinger. The latter, incidentally, as the Pope's envoy, met with Russian President Putin, with whose help Benedict XVI established contacts with the Russian political establishment.

Benedict XVI tried to include the Vatican in present-day global processes. This is shown by the propaganda about the need to set up the new World Bank in 2010, and in December 2012, a statement about a new world government. However, Benedict XVI did not want to confine himself to a mission of propaganda about a "new world order". The former pontiff saw a special role for the Vatican in this "new world", bearing in mind the number of Catholics in the world - the figure today is 1.2 billion - and huge financial resources. However, after the notorious political scandals Benedict XVI came face to face with financial problems, too.

The financial aspect

The "inclusion" of the Vatican in the globalization process could also mean in fact a transfer of the financial resources of the Holy See to the total control of trans-national corporations, which was bound to be a blow to the Vatican Bank (officially known as the Institute of Religious Affairs). The Pope, who is the only shareholder of this financial institution, faced unprecedented pressure when, in 2009, a book by Gianluigi Nuzzi "Vatican Ltd" was published, describing the mechanisms of money laundering via the Vatican Bank.

The next move was the arrest of part of the bank's finances and an investigation against its director, Tedeschi. The Vatican, having passed a law to fight money laundering, tried to present its bank as financially transparent in all respects. But this policy failed and was not accepted by the relevant institutions and expert groups of the Council of Europe, and in May 2012 another book by Nuzzi was published: "His Holiness: the secret papers of Benedict XVI". On the basis of stolen secret documents which the author obtained from the Pope's personal attendant, Paolo Gabriele, the book tells of corrupt schemes at the Vatican Bank. As a result the bank's supervisory council removed director Tedeschi from office, and a report by a committee of experts of the Council of Europe to assess measures in the fight against money laundering (Moneyval) showed that the banks activities did not conform to international standards. Italian banks were banned from collaborating with the Institute of Religious Affairs because of its failure to apply the norms of the EU in countering money laundering.

30 May 2012 is remembered for the signing of an agreement on the pooling of the assets of two of the biggest financial groups - Rothschild Investment Trust Capital Partners (RITCP), which belongs to the Rothschild dynasty, and Rockefeller Financial Services (RFS), which has been run as a family business by the Rockefellers and other wealthy US families for many years. Whether this was by accident or design,  by a strange clash of circumstances, the height of the scandal around the Vatican Bank and its stand-off with European financial structures happened at precisely that time.

In the opinion of analysts, such an alliance could have been directed against the Vatican. On this basis, we can say that the last decision of the Pope prior to his departure was not by accident. Shortly before his abdication, on 16 February, Benedict XVI appointed the German-born lawyer and financier Ernst von Freiberg a director of the Vatican Bank. It is very significant that the new director, up till then unknown to the Pope, was specializing in questions of financial mergers and takeovers.

Ernst von Freiberg is a member of the Order of the Knights of Malta, a rather secret organization which brings together members of the western elite, and one which has established itself as a leading international business club with serious influence on world politics. According to Italian media reports, it was members of the Order of the Knights of Malta, who are marking the 900th anniversary of its foundation, whom Benedict XVI met shortly before his abdication statement. This appointment indicates preparations for a merger between the financial system of the Holy See and the assets of trans-national financial groups.

Be that as it may, Benedict XVI quit his post as "God's apostle on earth", leaving behind a pile of questions and intrigue. The results of the election of the new Pope will show whether this was a forced departure or an astute move designed to prepare a more energetic and stronger successor for the battle against existing challenges. If the College of Cardinals chooses a moderate Pope, with more liberal views, unlike Benedict XVI, then there can be no doubt about the Pope's forced abdication. If the college votes in favour of a strong traditionalist conservative it will mean that Benedict XVI acted not to oblige his enemies.