Problems in Peru

The Word from Rome ^ | July 16, 2004 | John Allen

[AskStPhilomena]

To say that Cardinal Juan Luis Cipriani of Lima is a controversial figure is a bit like saying that Michael Jordan was a decent basketball player. True so far as it goes, but it hardly begins to capture reality. Even by the occasionally ugly standards of clerical politics, the tempests swirling around Cipriani, the world's first Opus Dei cardinal, seem almost surreal.

To his critics, Cipriani embodies an authoritarian model of leadership and a pietistic conception of the church, making him the ultimate anti-matter to liberation theology, the current that sought to align the Catholic church with progressive movements for social change. To his supporters, Cipriani is a beacon of moral and doctrinal clarity, a man of fidelity and evangelical zeal, who is living a sort of virtual martyrdom at the hands of his enemies both inside and outside the church.

That polarity makes Cipriani a love 'em or hate 'em figure -- and those who dislike this 61-year-old with an occasionally salty tongue really dislike him.

Case in point: Cipriani claims that he has been the object a black-bag campaign hatched by forces within the Catholic church, including some of his fellow Peruvian bishops. In an exclusive July 11 interview at his residence in Lima, he claimed this dirty tricks campaign, which pivots on a bungled forgery, was the fruit of "16 years of lies" from his ecclesiastical adversaries.

Here's the short version of a very long and complicated story.

In 2001, the then-Minister of Justice in the Peruvian government, Fernando Olivera, secretly carried three letters to the Vatican, one allegedly written by Cipriani, the others by the papal nuncio, or ambassador, Archbishop Rino Passigato. Cipriani's letter was addressed to the infamous Vladimiro Montesinos, head of the security forces under former Peruvian President Alberto Fujimori. (Fujimori is in exile in Japan for his role in a corruption scandal, while Montesinos is in prison). The letter purportedly showed Cipriani asking for the "elimination and incineration" of secret videotapes showing him with Montesinos. The other letters purported to show the nuncio thanking Montesinos for a contribution of $120,000 and asking for more money.

Cipriani is widely seen in Peru as an enemy of President Alejandro Toledo, and hence in the eyes of most observers Olivera was dispatched to Rome with the letters as part of an effort to discredit Cipriani, perhaps so that he would be removed.

The letters, however, turned out to be fakes. They were apparently concocted using scanned copies of letterhead stolen from the offices of the Peruvian bishops' conference.

The case rivals the Watergate burglary both in comic incompetence and in explosive potential.

"There are bishops involved," Cipriani said bluntly, describing himself as "completely convinced" that the attacks against him came from senior levels inside the church. He declined to name names, but described in detail how he believes the operation was carried out.

In another twist, Cipriani also asserts that the Vatican is trying to block the full truth from emerging about the case in order to prevent scandal, but predicts they will be unable to impede the state's attorney.

For the first time, Cipriani also revealed in the July 11 interview that the 2001 episode was not his first experience of faked letters. He claims that in 2000, a false letter was manufactured with his signature, this time addressed to the Vatican's Secretary of state, Italian Cardinal Angelo Sodano. It contained charges of immoral conduct against two other Peruvian bishops. Cipriani said the faked signature on the 2000 letter was in the same handwriting as the letters of 2001 currently under investigation.

[AskStPhilomena]

We're not dealing only with an Amchurch problem, folks. The apostasy is universal - and there are apparently only a few men left who are willing to brave the storm and battle to keep the light of Faith alive.