The Dispatch: More from CWR...

Interview indicates that Pope Francis knew more than enough about Zanchetta

Francis, in short, believed the explanation of his friend over and against the evidence.

Argentine Catholics pray outside St. Cajetan Church in in Buenos Aires in this 2017 file photo. (CNS photo/Marcos Brindicci, Reuters)

Among the biggest of the pieces that dropped in the major Papal interview with Noticieros Televisa’s long-time Vaticanologist, Valentina Alazraki, was the one about Pope Francis’s knowledge of the character and proclivities of his old acquaintance, the disgraced former bishop of Orán, Gustavo Zanchetta.

The short version is: Pope Francis knew enough. Here is a portion of the exchange, in the Catholic World Report’s translation:

NT: Staying on the subject of the lack of information, or the fact that not everything reaches [those it should]: In Argentina, for example, media say people had informed [you] about Bishop Zanchetta, that you here in the Vatican knew. You brought him here [to the Vatican], put him in a place that you created — practically from nothing for him. People don’t understand that.

PF: No, but you have to explain it to people.

NT: That’s why I’d like you to explain it.

PF: Do you want me to explain it now? I will do so with pleasure.

NT: If you’d like…

PF: Yes, then. There had been an accusation, and, before asking him to resign, I immediately brought him here with the person who accused him. [This was] an accusation [involving Zanchetta’s] telephone.

NT: Pictures…

PF: Yes, but in the end he defended himself by saying that they had hacked him, and he defended himself well. Then, in the face of evidence and a good defense, doubt remains. But, in dubio pro reo [when in doubt, decide in favor of the guilty], so I backed off [Sp. volvé, literally, “I turned around”]. And the Cardinal of Buenos Aires came to be a witness to everything. And I continued to follow it in a particular way. Certainly, he had a way of treating people that was, according to some, despotic, authoritarian, an economic management of things that was not entirely clear, it seems, but this has not been proven.

There is no doubt that the clergy did not feel well treated by him. They complained, until they made a complaint to the nunciature as a clergy. I called the nunciature and the nuncio told me: “Look, the issue of the complaint for mistreatment is serious,” abuse of power, we could say. They didn’t call it that, but this was it. I had him come here and I asked him to resign. Beautiful and clear. I sent him to Spain to take a psychiatric test. Some media have said: “The Pope gave him a holiday in Spain.” But he was there to take a psychiatric test. The test result was normal, they recommended outpatient therapy once a month.

He had to go to Madrid and do two days of therapy every month, so it didn’t make sense for him to go back to Argentina. I kept him here [at the Vatican] because the test said he had management, diagnostic, and consulting skills. Some here in Italy have interpreted [his position] as “parking” him.

NT: And they criticized you because — they said — there had not been a bad handling and you put him here in the APSA …

PF: It was not like that. Economically he was messy, but he did not manage poorly the things he did manage. He was disorderly, but the vision is good. And I started looking for a successor. Once the new bishop was there, in December of last year I decided to do the preliminary investigation of the accusations. I appointed the Archbishop of Tucumán [Carlos Alberto Sánchez, in office since October 2017]. The Congregation for Bishops proposed various names to me. I called the president of the Argentine bishops’ conference, I made him choose and he said the best one for this is the archbishop of Tucumán. Of course, mid-December in Argentina is like mid-June here — that is, the holidays — and then, January and February is like July-August here. But they did something. Something like fifteen days ago the preliminary investigation came to me. I read it, and I saw that it was necessary to make a judgment. Then I passed it to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, [and] they are making the judgment. So, why do I tell you all this? To tell impatient people — who say, “He did not do anything,” that the Pope does not have to go around publishing every day what he is doing, but from the very first moment of this case I’ve not [once] stood staring. There are cases that are long, that take more — like this one — and now I explain why: because, for one reason or another, I did not have the elements or ‘h’ or ‘b’, but today the case is already in judgment at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. I have not stopped.

Francis, in short, believed the explanation of his friend over and against the evidence. Then, after it became clear that his friend was morally warped and impossibly authoritarian, Francis let the fellow resign and proceeded to create a position for his friend in the Vatican, because the powerful and scandal-prone dicastery that manages the Holy See’s real estate and financial holdings could not do without the consultations and management acumen of a perverted despot.

The man entrusted with the earthly fortunes of the pilgrim Church also apparently has yet to ace the difference between prudent personnel decisions and criminal justice. He cited the maxim, in dubio pro reo, in the case of Bishop Barros, as well: to disastrous effect. He swore he’d learned his lesson after that episode, but one wonders.

Francis also said he continues to support the embattled Cardinal Archbishop of Tegucigalpa and Coordinator of his C9 C6 “kitchen cabinet” Council of Cardinal Advisers, Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga, because, “No one has been able to prove anything against him.” One wonders at this point what sort of evidence would satisfy this Pope, or even convince him to have real investigators take a closer look.


If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!

Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.


About Christopher R. Altieri 100 Articles
Christopher R. Altieri is a journalist, writer, and editor based in Rome, Italy. He spent more than a dozen years on the news desk at Vatican Radio. He holds the PhD from the Pontifical Gregorian University, and is the author of The Soul of a Nation: America as a Tradition of Inquiry and Nationhood.

10 Comments

  1. From what I have read elsewhere he touched upon Maradiaga of the Alazraki interview, again doing no credit to his powers of discernment. This is a train wreck. It is not getting better. The bottom of the cliff appears nowhere yet in sight. Will no man occupying the episcopate rescue this man from himself — let alone those of us who inhabit the collateral damage?
    https://thetablet.org/pope-francis-interview-mccarrick/

  2. Let me see if I understand Francis correctly: Francis removed Zanchetta from his diocese because he was abusing his power and authority and not because he was a homosexual predator abuser. If Francis is to be believed, why then did he create a powerful position for him at the Vatican as overseer of large sums of money? It would be like placing a so-called “John” who claimed to be reformed as manager of a whore house. If he were a recovering alcoholic, would you have him tend bar at Vatican cocktail parties?

    Secondly, Francis sent Zanchetta to Spain for a psychiatric evaluation. Francis says that the findings were negative. Yet Zanchetta was referred for monthly sessions of “teeatment.” One does not get “treatment” if the findings of a psychiatric exam are negative. And, besides, Francis tells us that poor, poor Zanchetta had to travel MONTHLY to Spain from Rome for this treatment. At whose expense? So, the person who Francis says had great skills in handling money is flying back and forth from Rome to Spain monthly for “outpatient treatment?” Francis thinks everyone is fooled. I am not.

  3. Either Pope Francis was naive to believe Zanchetta’s lies, or he deliberately promoted and protecting him solely because he is a friend despite him being a corrupt and depraved man. Either way not qualities we are entitled to expect from our Holy Father.

  4. I have been praying that someone high in the Roman Curia will step forth and tell what they knew, when they knew it and who else knew it to perhaps put pressure on
    Bergoglio. It appears that the more he speaks the more pressure he puts on HIMSELF! The Roman Curia MUST see this and must be making plans for when the pressure is so great that Bergoglio is forced to resign! We can only keep praying. The good Catholics of the world deserve a Pope we can trust and not one that ignores what the Church is trying to teach! Shame on you, Bergoglio, shame on you!

    • Under no circumstance should he resign. The Petrine Office is not a position—like a prime minister—in which the office holder should resign when his governance proves unpopular. The Church is not a democracy.

    • It is always wrong to force a Pope to resign. That is the worst of precedent.

      More so, these are mistakes anyone can make especially when the accused is a friend and the institution works slowly.

  5. What a complete disaster. This interview is turning out to be such a gold mine for exposing Francis as a fraud. Francis appears to be wrong, lying, and manipulating at every turn from the beginning to the end of the interview. Praying this is the beginning of the official end of this papacy and the cardinals pick a pope who will be nothing like Francis. Keep up the great work, Chris!

  6. This man on his trip to Ireland, dilly dallied about whether he would take an audience with child abuse victims had to backtrack because survivors no longer trust nor respect the church and were quite vocal about their outrage. 8 of us had our say and he was like the nodding dog in the back window of a car. Most left vowing never to set foot in a church again as he was merely going through the motions.

2 Trackbacks / Pingbacks

  1. Interview indicates that Pope Francis knew more than enough about Zanchetta -
  2. THVRSDAY EDITION – Big Pulpit

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

All comments posted at Catholic World Report are moderated. While vigorous debate is welcome and encouraged, please note that in the interest of maintaining a civilized and helpful level of discussion, comments containing obscene language or personal attacks—or those that are deemed by the editors to be needlessly combative or inflammatory—will not be published. Thank you.


*