Rorate Caeli

Pope Francis and the drama of sodomy in the Church and in the Diocese of Rome
The explosive report by La7 network

The affirmation by Pope Francis that there is a “gay lobby” in the Vatican, should not be reduced to an extemporaneous quip, but evaluated and weighed in all of its tragic consequences. “There are truly some saintly people in the Curia, but there is also a current of corruption. There is talk of a “gay lobby” , and it is true, it exists. We have to see what we can do about it.”

The Holy Father pronounced these words during a private audience with the leaders of the Confederation of Latin American Religious (CLAR) which took place in Rome on the 6th of June 2013. It was a private meeting, and the interlocutor was an authoritative body, which [afterwards] drew up a written report of the Pontiff’s conversation. This text was not destined for publication, but it is authentic, demonstrated by the fact that it went all round the world without any refutation from the Holy See.

The Pope did not refer to the Church in general, but to the Vatican, which is graver, because this is where he lives, surrounded by his closest collaborators. And it is exactly inside the Leonine City he affirms that a “lobby” exists, that is, a powerful and organized group, able to do all that a lobby normally does: exercise, in a licit or illicit manner, heavy pressure by directing some decisions in their own favour. The interests of a “ gay lobby” would be, in this case, that of promoting men who share the practice or ideology of homosexuality inside the Vatican institutions, and of avoiding the condemnation of this vice as it is [condemned] by the public conscience of the Church.

Ernesto Galli della Loggia, in an article published in the “Corriere della Sera” of the 23rd of June, wrote “I ask myself what would have happened if this expression – 'gay lobby' – had been adopted by Pope Ratzinger instead of Pope Francis, or more modestly, by a representative of the most acclaimed male chauvinism such as Silvio Berlusconi (…). You do not need much to imagine [the reactions]: accusations from all parts about language blatantly homophobic, heated protests about the denigrating and persecutory intentions implied in such an expression, complaints from all the homosexual associations, (…) and so forth. As in fact happened punctually in the past every time someone used similar words, and this someone for whatever reason was hated by that political part which identifies itself (no ifs and buts about it) with the cause of homosexual civil rights. But this time the expression 'gay lobby' was used by a person like Pope Francis, who has earned the universal reputation of being 'simple and good', to strike a group of powerful prelates, who have earned – let us be clear, for reasons more than justly deserved – the same universal reputation as the 'baddies'. I add simplifying quite brutally: because this time the words in question were intended to strike at a part that is generally considered corrupt and reactionary by definition, (in the first place, from the homosexual movement itself and its exponents). And thus [the term] 'gay lobby' can be used.”

It could also be asked why the same mass-media which speaks of “moral complicity” when a bishop intervenes in a very weak way towards a pedophile priest (see example : Francesco Merlo, That Slap to Cardinal O’Brien, in “La Repubblica”, 17th May 2013) [but] they are ready to attack him with “homophobe”, if he should intervene in a firm manner with a homosexual priest. Why is pedophilia a crime and homosexuality a right? The answer is simple. For the pseudo-relativist culture, that which renders pedophilia a crime is not its moral disorder, but the fact that the acts against nature are done harming minors. The reference is not to the moral law, but to the unlimited self-determination of the individual.

Pedophilia violates the rights of minors, while homosexuality affirms those of adults. Pedophile priests and homosexual priests in reality, appear to form the same “lobby” that is why they drink from the same libertarian, pansexual ideology, which has also penetrated inside the Church over the last fifty years.

The “homo-heresy”, namely, the theology of homosexuality, denounced by Father Dario Oko (With the Pope against Homoheresy), goes hand in hand with the theology of married priests. In both cases the enemy is the ecclesiastic celibate, a moral pillar which the Church has held on to since Her origins. Anyway, if the Pope expressed himself in these terms, he did so for obvious reasons. Some, such as the vaticanist Ignazio Ingrao, sustain that an entire chapter dedicated to the “gay network” is present in the relatio reported by the three cardinals charged by Benedict XVI to investigate the Curia: Julian Herranz, Salvatore De Giorgi and Jozef Tomko (Panorama, 24th June 2013). There are those who hypothesize that it was exactly the discovery of the presence of this network that would have pushed the abdication of Pope Benedict, by then intent in renouncing the Papacy. (“Il Fatto” 11th June 2013). There are also those who think that the words of the Pope would not be extraneous to the news that reached him about the events of Almo Collegio Capranica, denounced on the site “Corrispondenza Romana” in the article “The Drama of Sodomy in the diocese of Rome” which was promptly obscured by the Roman Tribunal. Behind that law-suit was the Rector of the Almo Collegio.

During the news on “La7 on the 25th June ( we learned of an inquiry in course by the Roman Magistrates concerning a head-spinning ring of sexual encounters hosted by religious with minors. The denunciation which triggered off the investigation would contain around twenty names, among which is a papal ceremoniere, a secretary to the Cardinal Vicar, four parish priests in charge of as many parishes to the north and west of Rome and other personalities of a high ecclesiastical level.

The behavior of certain ecclesiastical authorities confronted with scandals of this sort is astounding. When they learn of the existence of an immoral situation in a parish, in a college, in a seminary, they do not proceed to verify the truth, remove the guilty party and eliminate the filth, but manifest annoyance, if not reprobation towards those that have denounced the evil, and, in the best of cases, they limit themselves by taking into consideration that which may interest civil justice, for fear of being involved in judicial matters. They are silent about that which has purely a moral and canonical significance. The slogan could be “ zero tolerance” for the pedophiles, “maximum tolerance “ for homosexuals. The latter continue unperturbedly to occupy their places as parish priests, bishops, rectors of Colleges, forming that “homo-mafia” which Pope Francis defines as the “gay lobby.”

The Pope’s affirmation goes beyond the grave denunciation of the “ filth in the Church” made by Cardinal Ratzinger on Good Friday 2005, on the eve of his election to the Papacy. Also in that case the future Benedict XVI was certainly referring to the moral plague which, under the form of pedophilia, ephebophilia or more simply homosexuality was spreading throughout the Church. But the significance of Francis’ declaration is wider and reaches the one of Paul VI who in his homily of 29th June 1972, stated that “from some crack, the smoke of Satan” had entered “the Temple of God.” What is happening is exactly the consequence of that smoke of Satan which today is covering and suffocating the Church. Will Pope Francis intervene? This is the heartfelt plea of all those who are praying and battling for an authentic doctrinal and moral reform of the Mystical Body of Christ.

[Roberto de Mattei, Corrispondenza Romana, June 27, 2013; translation and source: Contributor Francesca Romana.]


  1. Since so many in the Church still believe or act as though there is no ongoing crisis of historic magnitude, then it is best that these things are exposed. This kind of thing is the only way to end the complacency. God have mercy.

  2. You often hear SSPX Chapel goers refer to the Ecclesia Dei communities as "fruits of the SSPX." In order to be consistent you must also refer to the SSPV, "the nine" who broke from SSPX, and the SSPX "strict observance" as also being fruits.

    While I believe the SSPX makes some valid points their assertions that the new Mass is 'evil' and that the FSSP are part of the problem is very problematic.

    The textbook definition of schism is 'the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.'

    This definition is enough to give one pause when considering the SSPX. True the Church has made no formal declaration of schism as far as I can tell but the Church has warned against attendance at an SSPX Chapel for the very reason of imbibing a schismatic mentality. This mentality is very real and sees faithful sons of the Church (ie. FSSP, ICK etc.) as "part of the problem."

    I pray that Rome either admit them "in" or formally excommunicate every member of the SSPX, Bishops, Priests and associated lay faithful for the sake of clarity.
    To me it does not seem just to leave the SSPX in this current grey area.

  3. Dear Sancte Alphonsus,

    The author of the quoted article, Roberto de Mattei, is not affiliated with SSPX at all.

    So, could you please explain what is the connection between this article and your post?

  4. @Sancte Alphonsus

    A major internal embarrassment comes to light in Rome and you think it profitable to talk about some eccentric Frenchmen?

  5. Sancte Alphonsus, your logic doesn't add up. Think of Judas. BTW, focus rather on Syrian christians plight and leave SSPX issue to those who are in the position to deal with it. What harm is SSPX doing to you?

  6. This was reported by Church Militant TV earlier today and it seem to confirm that there was a Homosexual Prostitution ring in Rome and as the facts come out it will be reported it involved several priests and a even a few high ranking Members of the Curia. When I heard this it is being officially revealed but I recall actually CNN was talking about this a few years ago in 2010 but nobody took it seriously

  7. Something that I am seeing frequently is that the SSPX is being recognized more and more by the faithful. I have read many times that it will be the people who will bring about the reform of the Church and not the Hierarchy. May God grant this be so. As the Hierarchy has gotten us only deeper into the mess in the Church for over 40 years.

  8. This while it makes for interesting articles should not be a difficult problem for the Holy Father to solve.

    People need to be sent back to their home dioceses and new blood brought in.

  9. This while it makes for interesting articles should not be a difficult problem for the Holy Father to solve.

    He just needs to fire everyone over there and bring in new people.

    The holy Father could turn to the Church of India, Africa and the Middle East and the more traditional religious orders such as 'gasp FSSPX, FSSP, Institute of Christ the King, to bring in people that are most likely not going to be suffering from this sort of thinking.

  10. All of it is connected.

    The New Mass, the New Theology, the "Spirit of Vatican II", the abuse scandal, the schizophrenic Popes, the collapse of the Orders, the convents, the monasteries, the pig-swill of multiple heresies, the triumph of Modernism, the destruction of the priesthood, this latest filth.

    All connected.

    Thank God for the very early testimony, witness and bravery of the likes of Frs. de Paauw and Malachi Martin, Archbishop Lefebvre and Castro Mayor, their Eminences Bacci and Ottaviani, the heroism of the SSPX!

    We, Soldiers of the Catholic Restoration, deserve some praise too. But we must fight, fight, not let up! This monstrous and probably unprecedented attack by the legions of hell on the Church and the world is, I believe, reaching its climax in our own days - right now.

    Learn the Faith, read and read again about La Salette, Fatima, Garabandal, Akita.

    Surely the time is not far distant.

    Benedict Carter

  11. Amen, Benedict Carter! Soldiers of the Catholic Restoration is your phrase? Are there pins available and where do we sign up?

    May God help us all--the "gay lobby" is very close to many of us through priests, bishops, and seminaries.

    How may we put feet to our prayers as laity? We must encourage the holy priests in our midst!

  12. Sancte Alphonsus, the Church despite its modernism cannot excommunicate the SSPX and all its members and lay faithful. You know why? To excommunicate them is to excommunicate the Church herself to which the SSPX submits with all her Traditions, Worship and Magisterium both Ordinary and Extraordinary. The only reason of the disobdience of SSPX is for them to obey the Church and its teachings for centuries. The hierarchy cannot impose disobedience to the Church in the name of obedience. Realizing this, Pope Benedict XVI has to lift their excommunication without requiring them to recant their disobedience. In fact, there were rumors that the Pope Emeritus wanted to give them canonical recognition unconditionally but the cardinals and bishops conferences particularly the German and French Bishops made a threat of big schism and disobedience to the Pope Emeritus.

  13. The article rightly points out what the reaction of the press would have been had Benedict referred to a "gay lobby" in the Vatican, but fails to comment on the fact that when Francis said those words the reaction was barely a ripple of interest. This is the dog that didn't bark in the night: the press and the homosexual pressure groups didn't react because they don't fear him.

    And why should they? All I've seen of Francis shows me a man who is determined to do exactly what he wants, and what he wants is to think about, talk about and work for "the poor". There's no other subject that interests him, and he is not a man who will sacrifice his own tastes in favour of something that bores or offends him. I expect he'll make a few comments deploring the situation, then turn eagerly back to what REALLY interests him, and this problem will be ignored.

    Even if he wanted to do something, I have no hope that he even could. Benedict is a brilliant, capable man, and he couldn't get anything done. Francis is second-rate at best - what qualities does he have that will make him any sort of adversary for an entrenched nest of Vatican insiders. They'll eat his lunch and send him back to schmooze with the gardeners and the janitors.

  14. Anonymous2:52 AM

    Jack, if you want to focus on the Latin Rite, fine, but enough with pushing eastern here.

    If you really want the truth of the lie of optional celibacy and the problems it has caused, listen to this and learn something:

  15. @Adfero: This and Card. Stickler's book, The Case for Clerical Celibacy, are good, too.

  16. @Dr. Mabuse: Pope Francis has Pope Benedict's insight and council.

  17. Horrible, horrible stuff.

    Kick them out Holy Father! ALL - OF -THEM! Please!

    I have to say that apart from the La7 report (which I didn't see but read briefly about) the other TV News on this is very low-key - very generic. One mentioned the papal master of ceremonies - but was very badly presented in that it was alluded to.

    With Pope Benedict they would have beaten us to death with this news doubt about is hard to know what's really going on but the faithful need clarity and stability Holy Father! Please tell the people the truth directly! And while you are at it please condemn in no uncertain terms "unnatural marriages". It won't change the situation immediately now - but you words as the Vicar of Christ will strengthen and sustain the faithful - all true Catholics - for the battle that we have to face and which now will be intensified after the USA Supreme Court decision the other day.


    Instead Dr. Mabuse, I think Pope Francis could do it - if he is determined enough - a certain human respect does not trouble him, plus I do not sense that he has fear for himself - and that's what's needed.

    I will pray a rosary for this intention today.

    Holy Mary, Mother Most Pure , pray for us all!

    St. Michael....

  18. I think I wrote this, just the other day, in a different com box: His Holiness has laid the groundwork for a cleaning of house, because those who euphorically praise his care for the poor, and praise his liturgical innovation - heaping scorn on anything which sounds like the traditionally recognizable teaching of Holy Mother Church - they have signed their own "death warrants". It's a scene in Henry V, by William Shakespeare.

  19. Dr. Mabuse,
    I so very very very much fear you are right at which point and feel a void starting to grow, not only between me and my Church (I am now tearing up as I type) but the void of silence between me and God, for if the Holy Spirit has directed the other cardinals to make the Argentine the Pope to remake his church, and then does nothing, the Vicar of Christ has done nothing regarding sodomy in the House of the Lord.

    Why would God our Father, after giving a chance to cleanse His house, talk to any of us?

    Is this the course of action - nonaction? So the Pope can then say he was a man of peace and thus led the Church to the Cross as Jesus? Will he quote Render unto Cease what is his? And give the Lord everything else? Are we to live in a time of babble to make the Gospels applicable to what is not done or done for the wrong reasons?

    Its like Jerusalem and Babylon all over again.

    I am in the wilderness of despair.

  20. Morgan!


    I hear this nonsense about the Holy Ghost choosing the next Pope all over the Catholic net. Where on earth does this idea come from?

    The Holy Ghost does NOT choose the Pope - men do; and they have often got it very wrong.

    Too early to tell about this man Bergoglio, although I do not like him at all. But "liking" is irrelevant.

    The Holy Ghost gives the graces in a Conclave that the Cardinals may choose the right man, but it does NOT guarantee that they cooperate with that grace; nor, looking at the filthy sewer which is the institutional Church right now, that they are in a moral state that they can even sense that grace.

    If you are going to despair, that's your business, but don't despair over a piece of pious ultramontane nonsense.

    Benedict Carter

  21. Anonymous12:16 PM

    Morgan, he is correct.

    It's not like the Holy Ghost lifts up the cardinals' hands and makes them vote for a pope!

    God offers His guidance to the electors, all fallible men. Whether they accept it or not is up to them. Clearly, they have voted for some rotten popes before. Clearly that wasn't God's express will.

  22. I am amazed at calls to excommunicate the SSPX. We have Masses for gay and lesbian groups, prayer services, for them too,priests accepting civil unions, etc etc. give me the SSPX any day. Excommunication!!! They should be given some sort of papal award for upholding the faith

  23. Rorate Caeli,

    May I ask - beg - you to to publish the names of those who are clearly and unrefutedly involved in these scandals? It seems abundantly clear that only after the culprits have been "outed" by the press will there be any hope at all in actions being taken to remedy the dramatic situation.

  24. \\Jack, if you want to focus on the Latin Rite, fine, but enough with pushing eastern here.\\

    Believe it or not, the Roman rite is NOT the entirety or even standard of the Catholic Church. Read Leo XIII's encyclical Orientalis dignitatem. Furthermore, I thought this site was about traditional Catholicism, and the Eastern Churches are traditionally Catholic, too.

    And claiming that homosexuality is directly related to having married priests is not only false, but insulting and demeaning.

    It is PRECISELY this Latin triumphalist attitude you are showing that impedes Orthodoxy and the non-Chalcedonian churches from being reconciled with the Catholic Church.


  25. I just don't understand why X is going to hell for committing Y, when all these people do W, and they don't get punished at all.

    I am great sympathetic to the SSPX's situation, but please, as Catholics can we recognize that the moral life has more than one dimension?

    Who said it was easy to be holy?

    Again, I would regularize them tomorrow if it were up to me; realizing it isn't, I also remember that canon law matters.

  26. Adfero thanks for that link and WELL SAID!!!

  27. This is a very good read and helps clarify the reasons for the SSPX episcopal consecrations which seems to be what is causing most of the difficulty in understanding the necessity for the SSPX to hold its position as the last bastion to stand up to Rome and demand a return to tradition in every aspect of the faith.
    Understanding the Episcopal Consecrations in the Context of a Legally Unhinged World by
    By Brian M. McCall, JD @ CFN - Catholic Family News.
    Please follow link – very informative.

  28. Anonymous2:21 AM

    My kids go to an SSPX school. I sent them there after the local diocesan Catholic School appointed an Anglican as a religion teacher.

    I'm not a member of the SSPX although I often attend Society Masses and I must admit to being very pleased with the school.

    I don't care what any critic of the SSPX says, I am Catholic, not schismatic. That's more than I can say for alleged Archbishops like Rembert Weakland.


Comment boxes are debate forums for readers and contributors of RORATE CÆLI.

Please, DO NOT assume that RORATE CÆLI contributors or moderators necessarily agree with or otherwise endorse any particular comment just because they let it stand.


(1) This is our living room, in a deeply Catholic house, and you are our guest. Please, behave accordingly. Any comment may be blocked or deleted, at any time, whenever we perceive anything that is not up to our standards, not conducive to a healthy conversation or a healthy Catholic environment, or simply not to our liking.

(2) By clicking on the "publish your comment" button, please remain aware that you are choosing to make your comment public - that is, the comment box is not to be used for private and confidential correspondence with contributors and moderators.

(3) Any name/ pseudonym/ denomination may be freely used simply by choosing the third option, "Name/URL" (the URL box may be left empty), when posting your comment - therefore, there is no reason whatsoever to simply post as "Anonymous", making debate unnecessarily harder to follow. Any comment signed simply as "Anonymous" will be blocked.

Thank you!