He then met its members on 10 July.
The commission was increasingly seen as essential, partly as a means of reassuring the Catholic public, which was shaken by the inquiries and new judicial revelations that kept on sprouting up, casting shadows over some figures who used the Vatican bank to serve their own interests.
Concerns grew after the resignation of the IOR’s director general, Paolo Cipriani and its deputy, Massimo Tulli.
The aim is to do a complete screening of the bank’s activities, which is an absolute must before any reforms are introduced.
The commission’s members include Cardinal Jean-Louis Tauran (formerly a member of the IOR’s council of cardinals), the coordinator, Mgr. Juan Ignacio Arrieta Ochoa de Chinchetru, the secretary, Mgr. Peter Bryan Wells, whom Francis kept on as Assessor for General Affairs of the Secretariat of State and former U.S. Ambassador Mary Ann Glendon.
The commission’s task is to collect documents, data and information relating to the Vatican bank’s activities and progress and refer this information to the Pope.
This should “enable better harmonization of said Institute with the mission of the Universal Church and the Apostolic See, in the more general context of reforms that should be carried out by the institutions that aid the Apostolic See,” a Secretariat of State communiqué read.
The commission is sacrosanct and absolutely necessary given the tendency some prelates have, at all levels, to put what’s in the safe before the content of the tabernacle.
But even though the Vatican is a separate State, it is still in Italy, where farce is never far away, even when there are very serious situations at hand.
A prelate friend of mine who has been working in the Vatican for about twenty years, told me he had to have some work done on his house – a small apartment belonging the Vatican – and to pay for it he asked someone in the Congregation’s secretariat to withdraw just over €3,000 ($4,000 approx.) from his current account at the IOR for him.
The bank clerk went and came back with the money. But two or three days later the bishop received a telephone call from an anonymous male caller who said: “IOR Commission”; “who am I speaking to?” the prelate responded; “the IOR Commission”; “Listen, I have a great respect all commissions, but you see any journalist could call me and say: “IOR Commission”.
Who exactly am I speaking to?” the prelate answered, perplexed, to which the person calling replied: “It doesn’t matter who’s calling, it’s the IOR Commission.”
The prelate gave up and said: “Fine, what can I do for you?” “Why did you withdraw €3500? What are you going to use it for?”; “Listen, I didn’t steal the money, I have an account with the IOR and I stupidly have all my money with the bank. If I could turn back time I would do differently. Even my parents’ pension savings are in the IOR account.”
The man on the other end of the phone could hear the prelate was irritated and said: “Yes, of course monsignor, I under stand, but you know, it must be said…,” to which the prelate replied: “Why don’t you do this: you pay the builder directly for me.”
The builder was well known in the Vatican and the anonymous caller recognised who it was immediately: “Oh, Rossi… (the builder’s name has been changed for confidentially purposes, Ed.)”; “Yes, exactly, the guy who does work for the Secretariat of State…Pay him directly. But tell me this: if I buy a pair of shoes or some Christmas presents, do I need to tell you about that too?”
The conversation ended with a stream of apologies and friendly utterances. This is the Vatican in the time of the Commissions of Inquiry…