By Mariaelena Finessi
ROME, APRIL 15, 2011 (Zenit.org).- It is well known that calumnies against Padre Pio reached as high as the Vatican. But according to author Stefano Campanella, Pope John XXIII kept a benevolent predisposition toward the friar, as well as a certain confidence in his defenders.
“Oboedientia et pax” looks at John XXIII’s views on Padre Pio, based on studies of unpublished documents. It was presented March 22 at Vatican Radio.
Cardinal Angelo Amato, prefect of the Congregation for Saints’ Causes, and Gian Maria Vian, director of L’Osservatore Romano, also joined in the presentation.
The volume reconstructs a period in the life of Padre Pio, which official biographies had not previously examined. Benedict XVI’s secretary of state, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, notes in the preface that the study confronts certain questionable historical interpretations, namely, the myth of a “persecuted” saint, Padre Pio.
It is known that the Capuchin was the object of such serious calumnies that they arrived to the Holy Office and were referred to John XXIII. However, the documents show how the Holy Father came to protect the friar.
It speaks of two people who investigated Padre Pio, claiming an exaggerated mandate from the Pope. Yet, the Capuchin and the Bishop of Rome had a deeper bond, according to the author: They had an “identical concept of a priest’s mission and role and the same way of positioning [themselves] within the Church, that is, to find interior peace in obedience.”
Campanella also recounts a one-day apostolic visit in 1961 that ended with a very dire report of Padre Pio, including that “he is not, nor can he be, a saint,” nor even is he “a worthy priest.”
In the face of such accusations, John XXIII consulted the archbishop of Manfredonia. Evidenced from the conversation that Campanella recounts in his book, John XXIII understood that the accusations directed against Padre Pio had been constructed artificially. He ordered the Holy Office not to increase sanctions on the friar. Hence, Campanella’s book affirms, although a persecution existed, it was not the Bishop of Rome who directed it.
