Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Jul 31, 2020 / 12:30 pm (CNA).- New details have emerged about the links between the two Italian businessmen at the center of the Vatican financial scandal.
In the months before Gianluigi Torzi was asked by the Holy See to act as middle man for the final purchase of the London property at 60 Sloane Ave. from Raffaele Mincione, a company owned by Mincione secured a multi-million-euro loan from a company controlled by Torzi.
Last month, Torzi was arrested by the Vatican and charged with a range of financial crimes. The following day, Vatican-state media accused Mincione of a “conflict of interest” in his management of investments for the Secretariat of State.
The Financial Times reported on July 30 that in January, 2018, Sunset Financial, a Malta based company controlled by Torzi, provided a 26.4 million euro line of credit to Pop 12 Sarl., a Luxembourg company owned by Mincione.
Corporate filings in Luxembourg, examined by CNA, show that the credit line, from which Mincione’s company borrowed nearly 14 million euros in January 2018, was secured against an investment in the Italian Banca Carige.
The filings also show that in 2018, Pop 12 paid Torzi’s company more than 700,000 euros for the arrangement of the loan and for other “legal consulting fees” related to its Carige shares.
In February 2018, Mincione’s company borrowed an additional 12 million euros from a line of credit extended Global Prime Partners, Ltd (GPP), a European prime broker. The line of credit was secured with the same collateral as the credit line from Sunset Financial: the Carige bank shares.
According to filings by Pop 12, since the GPP credit line was secured against “all the Carige shares held by the company,” the Sunset debt was subordinated to the GPP debt – meaning that, if necessary, Torzi could be repaid only after GPP.
Over the course of 2018, the share value of Carige collapsed, and Pop 12 reported a loss of nearly 17.5 million euros on the value of 24.9 million euro holding in the bank, leaving it unable to cover the loans from GPP and Sunset.
In November 2018, Torzi was asked by the Vatican Secretariat of State to broker the final purchase of the London building from Mincione.
Corporate filings in Luxembourg examined by CNA show that weeks after the final sale of the building to the Vatican, Mincione loaned millions of euros from his Athena Capital Real Estate and Special Situations Fund 1 (through which he owned and sold the building) to Pop 12 to repay part of the loan from GPP, which, because of the company’s debt structure, made it more likely Pop 12 could eventually repay its debt to Torzi’s company.
Both men have denied that the Pop 12 – Sunset loans played in Torzi’s role in the Vatican’s purchase of the London building from Mincione.
A spokesman for Mincione told CNA that “the suggestion that any commercial relationship between Pop 12 and Sunset Financial had any influence on the Vatican’s decision to appoint Mr Torzi as agent, is entirely wrong.”
CNA asked Mincione if Torzi, or Sunset Financial Ltd., were involved in Pop 12 securing the line of credit from GPP, and if there was any discussion, professional or social, between Torzi and Mincione of the Vatican’s investment in the London property prior to November 2018.
Mincione’s spokesman characterized the dealings between Pop 12 and Sunset as “a very usual commercial arrangement” and said “it doesn’t seem necessary for us to respond to [these] points.”
Details of the pre-existing business relationship between Mincione and Torzi come nearly two months after Torzi was arrested by Vatican authorities on charges of “extortion, embezzlement, aggravated fraud and self-laundering,” in relation to his part in the deal.
Following Torzi’s arrest, Mincione said that Torzi’s involvement in the London deal came at the instruction of the Secretariat of State without any input from him.
Speaking to ADN Kornos in June, Mincione said Torzi was a “counterpart,” not a “partner,” and characterized their personal connection casually as “two Italians in London.”
While dismissing their personal acquaintance, saying they knew each other slightly since their offices were off the same square in London, Mincione also told AN Kornos that he had in his possession a photograph of Torzi with Pope Francis. A similar image was subsequently released online.
The building at 60 Sloane Avenue was bought by the secretariat in stages between 2014-2018 from Mincione, who at the time was managing hundreds of millions of euros of secretariat funds. CNA has previously reported that Mincione also invested Vatican funds in other companies and projects owned by or connected to him.
The Vatican cut ties with Mincione in 2018, acquiring the whole of the London property and withdrawing its remaining investment with Athena, asking Torzi to broker the final transfer of ownership, which he did using his own Luxembourg holding company, Gutt SA, as a pass-through, earning Torzi some 10 million euros in the process.
Before Torzi’s arrest, CNA reported that Fabrizio Tirabassi, a lay secretariat official who oversaw investments, was appointed a director of Torzi’s company while the businessman was finalizing the Vatican’s purchase of the London property from Mincione.
On June 6 this year, Vatican News described Mincione’s management of Vatican investments as “speculative” and a “conflict of interest.” Later that month, Mincione, through two of his companies, filed lawsuits against the Secretariat of State and the holding company which controls the London building, and which he sold to the secretariat.
Earlier this month, Vatican prosecutors, working with Italian authorities, executed a search and seizure warrant against Mincione. Italian media reported that Mincione, accompanied by his lawyers, presented himself to police by prior arrangement, who seized electronic devices, including cellular phones and iPads.
Vatican action against Mincione was the latest development in a 18-month-long ongoing investigation into financial dealings by the Secretariat of State.
A series of raids by Vatican authorities, beginning in October last year, have resulted in the suspension of several serving and former employees at the secretariat, including Tirabassi, as well as Msgr. Alberto Perlasca, whose home and office were raided earlier this year.
[…]
Like Keanu Reeves in the Matrix [inspiration by Francis X Maier article] Card Arborelius has taken the red pill rather than remain in the anesthetized state of his down South compatriots.
Nordic bishops are outspoken in criticizing the trend toward heterodoxy within our Church. Perhaps it’s similar to a newer Church similar to Nigeria’s heroic witness amid murderous Islamists. Although the Lutherans aren’t murderous, at least not in comparison. Liberally aggressive perhaps. Intellectually adrift. Ingmar Bergman’s films reflect the search for meaning. At any rate it’s complex. At least their bishops have something to offer. Would that their spirit enlivens
their compatriots.
The Nordic bishops…sort of peripheral?
Might we hope that all of the new bishops and cardinals of the “periphery” in Africa and Asia will see with non-secularist eyes, unlike much of the West, and exert their evangelical and institutional influence at the Synods and at the next conclave?
As if, rather than “primarily as [yes] facilitators,” they are “sent” (apostello), firstly and truly primarily as successors of the apostles. Sent by the historical and incarnate Jesus Christ–the incongruous, “concrete,” and leavening fact (!) at the center of all ambulatory human history, and more than one pluralist idea among many.
Nordic bishops are reactive to a Lutheran culture, whereas bishops in the West, specifically Europe are products of a dying religious culture influenced by secularist intellectual trends. Our US bishops are in a gradual trend toward the European model nevertheless more reactionary to secularism. Bishops Strickland, Cordileone examples of that reaction.
All bishops are first of all defenders of the faith as successors of the Apostles. This is the battle line perpetrated by this pontificate and challenged by a very few Strickland the standout. Fr Gerald Murray articulated this dynamic on World Over and the apparent rationale for which he’s being prosecuted if not persecuted. This is spiritual life and death matter to be taken with due appreciation. Analogously, we’re, that is, those of us prepared to defend the faith at whatever cost are the thin black line of clergy who stand to fight in the shadow of the Cross [wording inspired by Therese of Lisieux]. Strickland deserves our full support. In terms of honor he requires our support.
You’re correct, there is no periphery at play here, there are men prepared to give the glory of their loyalty to Christ.
As a woman myself, I have no interest in attending a “Mass” conducted by a woman. I have seen such conducted at protestant churches and I find them lacking. Nor could I envision going to confession to one. Why don’t these women stick to the many ministries already open to women? I am tired of hearing about this topic, as are many Catholics. Its also a certainty I would not support it financially.
Well, I left the Catholic Church for many years when I felt a call as a woman toward becoming a deacon, and realized I was denied this on the basis of my genetics. Somehow I missed that entire part of my upbringing as a Catholic, and even into my adulthood when I was struck by, basically, a “born again” episode at age 27 and plunged into study and prayer. Well, my journey from there took me to 2 other female-led churches within the Episcopal Church, in the pain of rejection by my own Church. At first, it was balm, but after 10 years, I realized that the Episcopal Church in general, and our Churches in particular, had been led astray by the emotion of our society instead of sticking with the reality of our Christian faith. I returned to Catholic with much unresolved feelings of betrayal still, but the Body of Christ is what keeps my in the Church and keeps me going. I believe that women have a place as Deacons, and would deeply like to see that emerge for all the roles Deacons can play, but also, because of the way that the other women-led churches have been led astray by emotion and strayed so far as to actively support even abortion, I have to agree, women as priests, therefore with growing power to change our Church, should not happen.
Pauline, for you, the sex of a person seems to figure most prominently in how you practice your religion. So I have a few questions for you.
#1. Does it matter to you at all that the Savior – God incarnate – came among us as a man and not as a woman?
#2. Does it matter to you at all that Jesus Christ did not have a human Father, but a Divine Father and was born of a human mother?
#3. Does it matter to you that the only human person graced by God to be born free of original sin was a woman?
How do these three sexual anomalies/disparities/distinctions figure into your faith as a Catholic? I’d be curious to know what you make of these.
Ordaining women is part of a sure path to shrinking congregations & irrelevance. I returned recently from a trip to the UK & this was the case in each CE church we visited. One cathedral c. 670 AD had exactly three elderly couples attending evening prayer led by a woman clergy member. The church events calendar advertised upcoming Elvis & Abba themed music performances inside the cathedral. Using what should be sacred space for Elvis impersonations might garner a higher attendance than evening prayer but does little for a dwindling church membership.
LJ, I agree completely with all of your points.
To your question of why women don’t stick to ministries open to them, the answer is that the question is not, nor has it ever been, about ministry. It’s all about power, whether perceived or actual. One simply has to listen to any of the arguments in favor of priestesses. All of them involve repetitive use of terms such as “patriarchy”, “hierarchy”, “sexism”, “exclusion” and the like. These are expressions of grievance that refer to power or its lack. These are not the words of those who seek first the salvation of souls or expanded understanding of the splendor of truth (both capitalized and lower case).
What’s critically important to understand is that when the the Church says “no”, She always points at the same time to an exalted “yes”. The key is to find, and to live, the yes. Therein lies the path to eternal life.
I too believe I would be uncomfortable with woman in the role of priests. Mostly, I think because Jesus and the apostles were male. Some would say that was the times, the culture. But yet, the Bible clearly states the role of the husband and a wife in marriage. Priscilla along with her husband Aquila are mentioned as helpers to Paul. She seemed to be an important source of spreading the gospel but she was not a priest. I do get tired of women who insist they are being demeaned, disrespected, etc. if not allowed to be a priest. There are so many ways to participate in the faith.
Well, thanks I guess.
Maybe Cardinal Müller will have one friend. If I recall, that was crucial in middle school
Welcome common sense from Sweden and not for the first time. Who would’ve thought?
Sweden apparently exercised some commonsense during Covid also. At least it seems that way so far.
I never in my right mind thought I’d live to see the day when a bishop from Scandinavia came out as a Defender of the Faith.
(Just in case anyone should be inclined to accuse me of not being aligned with the Catholic Church : “Francis truly IS the Pope.” There, I’ve repeated the required mantra.)
It certainly shouldn’t be a focal point of the discussion. It shouldn’t be any part of the discussion, truth be told.
As a Discalced Carmelite, I am grateful to my Swedish Brother for his clear and charitable presentation of the faith!
I recently posted my own statement on the ordination of women in reply to an article in The Tablet: https://flemingtoncarmel.org/posts/the-place-of-women-in-the-church