Wikipedia Scandal: Vatican Mole Reports

By Dr. Jeff Mirus ( bio - articles - email ) | Aug 20, 2007

The BBC reported last Thursday that the Vatican has altered entries on Wikipedia, specifically the article on Gerry Adams, the Irish leader of the political party Sinn Fein. According to the story, a tool called the Wikipedia Scanner shows the identity of organizations which alter Wikipedia articles.

Of course, anyone in the world can edit Wikipedia articles, and while Internet tools can be used to retrieve information about the computer from which an edited page is posted, these tools can be fooled and, in any case, the use of a computer somewhere in the Vatican City State to edit Wikipedia is hardly an indication that “the Vatican” has done anything at all. But the plot thickens. According to the report, the CIA has also edited certain articles, the CIA being not very good at covering its tracks.

Well now we’re concerned, so we put out the usual feelers. It turns out that CatholicCulture.org’s Vatican mole was hard at work two weeks ago and actually attended the meeting—incognito, of course—at which a covert series of instructions was given by the Vatican Secretary of State, using code names, to mobilize the college of cardinals for certain super-sensitive missions. Cardinal 008 was assigned the supervision of the clergy, 009 was detailed to serve as secretary for Catholic education, 006 was mobilized as ambassador to China, and 007, of course, was assigned to the Wikipedia Disinformation Group.

007 is as new to the game as the CIA, so he just stepped into his regular office and logged in. Pay no attention to speculation that the coupling of “CIA” and “Vatican” in BBC reports sounds too good to pass up. Sure, some believe this linkage has a certain something which makes for exciting journalism—the odor not of sanctity but of skullduggery. But pay no attention.

In fact, another report has just come in, partly scrambled, hard to decipher. It appears that the CIA actually owns the Vatican. Or, no, it looks like it’s the other way around. We can state definitely that it is one or the other. What’s that, moley? Mel Gibson’s involved? Opus what? Breaking up. We’ll get back to you.