In the new documentary, “Francesco,” the filmmaker, Evgeny Afineevsky, asked Pope Francis during an interview about the place of L.G.B.T. (“Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender”) Catholics in the church. Francis reemphasized his belief that L.G.B.T. people should be made to feel welcome in the church. “Homosexuals have a right to be a part of the family,” the pope said. “They’re children of God and have a right to a family. Nobody should be thrown out or be made miserable because of it. “What we have to create is a civil union law,” he said. “That way they are legally covered. I stood up for that.” As pope, Francis has urged a more welcoming church for L.G.B.T. people, beginning with his response to a question in 2013 about gay priests, “Who am I to judge?” Juan Carlos Cruz, a survivor of clergy sexual abuse who clashed with church leaders over the pope’s handling of sexual abuse in Chile, has developed a friendship with Francis. In the documentary, Mr. Cruz says he has discussed his sexuality with the pope, who allegedly told him, “God made you gay. God loves you like you are and you have to love yourself.
This is not going to be a prolix column because not a great deal needs to be said. The fewer words the better was George Orwell’s writing philosophy and we concur. It’s like being asked whether or not America is a white supremacist nation. While white racism is real and undenaibly exists in pockets in this country (along with anti-Hispanic, anti-white and anti-Asian racism), no disquisition on white supremacy as America’s alleged signature contemporary pestilence, is necessary. Reply in seventeen words and end the matter: “No nation that twice elected a black man to its highest office is a white supremacist nation.”
We would prefer to be just as succinct with anti-Pope Francis: “No Catholic pontiff can welcome into the Church those who practice sodomy.”
Yet, in dealing with Vatican pilpul and flummery it is necessary to elucidate at least a few dimensions of this crisis for the sake of clarity.This is necessary because Francis and his conferes are likely to generate a smokescreen by arguing that they are not welcoming those who actively engage in sodomy, but only those who have an orientation toward it.
Let’s test this putative pontiff’s sincerity. Substitute for “L.G.B.T. people” the holocaust revisionists who doubt, according to conscience, the existence of homicidal gas chambers in Auschwitz. Imagine Francis issuing the following pronouncement:
“Holocaust revisionist people have a right to be a part of the family. They’re children of God. Nobody should be thrown out because of it.”
Anti-Pope Francis would never make that statement. Why? Because Francis believes that doubting the existence of execution gas chambers is a grave sin. So what is the logical corollary? “L.G.B.T. people” are not committing grave sins. His absolution is contrary to the law of God; concerning which, we should contemplate Psalm 119, and the words of Jesus in John 14:15, “If you love me, keep my commandments.” To rehabilitate homosexual acts, one must nullify the Torah.
“But Jesus never spoke against homosexuality,” is the reply. Neither did He speak contra abortion. He did however, define marriage exactly as His Father decreed in Genesis 5:2: between a man and a woman. Sex is a transgression against divine law on any occasion when it is not between a male and female within the bonds of matrimony.
This is fixed dogma which permits no loopholes, or the infamous casuistry which this pope, like many before him, employs. It is at this juncture that our position differs radically from almost all other conservative Catholics, when we observe that sex with men and boys was institutionalized inside the Church long before Vatican II. Molestations were at epidemic levels in pontificates regarded as “traditional,” due to the perceived need to protect the reputation of the “higher-souled” priest-molester, and because of the secrecy in which is wrapped the homosexual activities of the Roman hierarchy (which are as labyrinthine as its financial dealings).
The most faithful and effective opponent of sodomy in the past 500 years was an Italian Dominican who Pope Alexander VI excommunicated and demanded be executed by fire. The pope’s wish was made reality on May 23, 1498.
The martyr’s name was Girolamo Savonarola and he had turned Florence, previously the capital of sodomy in Italy, into a renewed Catholic community free of the homosexual gangs that had roamed brazenly. After he was stripped and burned in the city’s central Plaza della Signoria, the “gay” elite were heard to remark, “Now we can sodomize!” and Florence quickly returned to its pagan putrescence (cf. The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome, pp. 222-237).
As far back as a thousand years ago Saint Peter Damian spoke of a “Satanic tyranny” that had spread the “cancer of sodomy” inside the Church. (cf. The Occult Renaissance Church of Rome, pp. 481-498). He recognized that a celibate religious priesthood must exercise constant vigilance against the attraction of homosexually-oriented persons to its ranks, and to keep from positions of ecclesiastical influence or power those individuals, while maintaining a relentless Biblical polemic contra sodomy. Such are the minimum requirements of male celibacy lived in community, which prudence dictates.
Search the records: over a millennia Peter Damian and Savonarola comprised only a minuscule number who raised this warning, and of these two, one of them was burned to death at the urging of the reigning pontiff.
Centuries after St. Damian, and twenty-nine years after the judicial murder of Savonarola, on Maundy Thursday, 1527, the heroic Italian peasant street preacher Brandano da Petroio called Medici Pope Clement VII—to his face, “Bastardo sodomita!” (“sodomite bastard”)— an act of intrepid truth-telling for which he was imprisoned under harsh conditions, until liberated by Spanish troops during the sack of Rome.
In the ensuing 493 years no other jeremiad against papal and Vatican sodomy appeared until the extent of the systematic molestation of youths was made notorious beginning in the early years of this century. The molestation network is still in place, however. For example, in Spokane, Washington a “Catholic” institute has been created, named for William Skylstad, the bishop who facilitated molester priests in the diocese. It advertises in the local newspaper. Moreover, beginning in 2007, Blase Cupich, while bishop of Spokane, conspired with the Jesuits of Gonzaga University to secretly harbor child molesters at Cardinal Bea House, a priests’ retirement home situated on the campus. This area was frequented by many dozens of children of the local St. Aloysius parish church, and thousands of students at the university. Cupich was subsequently rewarded by being elevated to the rank of cardinal by “Pope” Francis.
Under Francis, the charming and voluble Rev. Fr. James Martin has become the highest profile “homosexual rights” campaigner in the English-speaking world, spreading the “Catholic” gospel of “gay.”
It is a truism that homosexually-oriented persons who do not engage in the sin of sodomy are as deserving of rights and protection as any other human being. Thoughts, emotions and proclivities are not in themselves criminal or even necessarily sinful, and yes — some people are “born that way.”
Yet, we ought to keep in mind that certain individuals from a young age have over-powering desires to engage in incest. In the name of their “love” for their mother, sister or daughter, shall we “make them feel welcome in the Church” as they practice their perversions?
Some people would also seem to have developed, from early youth, tendencies toward murderous predation, cannibalism, sex with children and even bestiality. How is a strong orientation from a young age toward abominable sins, grounds for accommodating those sins by “welcoming” those who engage in them?
For the views of Francis to be even remotely Catholic, he would have to strenuosuly and without a trace of ambiguity, differentiate between celibate homosexuality and practicing homosexuality, and warn in the gravest terms against the latter.
Francis would also have to be cognizant that a lax attitude even toward non-practicing homosexuals can lead to the further entrenchment of the sub-rosa “gay” culture inside the hierarchy and priesthood of the Church. It is incumbent on him to parse his words in such a way that he makes it clear that Jesus offers complete liberation from all forms of bondage, including sex addictions. No one need accommodate themselves to the torment of a disordered orientation—least of all the Church itself. The first step in the divine healing process is for the individual to acknowledge his sinfulness and then call upon the grace of Jesus Christ to change his ways in sorrow for his transgressions: “Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord” (Acts 3:19). We see no such call coming from Francis. Rather he is sending signals of accommodation of the predominant media culture, of the continue-in-your-sins variety, normalizing the unnatural. This is the voice of the Vatican’s centuries-old “gay” mafia, not of anything holy or counter-cultural.
In the name of the compassion which Our Lord offers to all of us sinners, including filthy usury bankers, wicked environmental polluters of our air, soil and water, ruthless purveyors of ruinous false witness and gossip, and all of the other mortal sins of which we are guilty, we must surely feel pity and exhibit profound Christian charity toward those afflicted with a homosexual orientation.
Admittedly, this charity has been lacking in self-righteous Right wing and conservative circles. This omission on their part has contributed to the sense on the Left that persons with homosexual feelings have been wronged by the Catholic world. Both views are unbalanced. Biblical truth must be affirmed and proclaimed without fear of being termed politically incorrect or “bigoted,” yet these Scriptural admonitions should be offered from a foundation of loving kindness.
In the long tradition of fork-tongued Vatican double-talk, we think that this papacy will exploit the confusion concerning what is at issue in this struggle. Francis and his allies will say they are defenders only of those who “were born that way.” Perish the thought that their intention is to welcome into the Church men who have sex in the sewer of the human body. But make no mistake: that is the end result of this latest papal pronouncement.
As damage control, we predict that in the future Francis will shade and modify the remarks he made to film-maker Evgeny Afineevsky. He will run the gamut between the casuist’s poles of laxity and severity. By this stratagem his supporters on the Left can cite the declaration of Francis in the “Francesco” documentary to harass Catholic schools and hospitals that have thus far rebuffed employees engaged in homosexual “civil unions” and “marriages.”
The moderating “clarification” which he or his cronies will issue will convey something along the lines of, “In no way has the pope ever intended to depart from the doctrine of the Church on this matter.” This ruse will in turn provide Catholics on the Right with the ammunition they need to deceive themselves and others into fantasizing that their pope is not engaged in opening the ecclesiastical door ever wider to the curse of sodomy, and the enablement of the homosexual cabal which, since the Middle Ages, has clamored for control at the highest levels.
We have seen many references to “Sodom and Gomorrah” in the course of this upheaval, as if that was the only event in the Bible that takes up coercion and violence by homosexuals. Because Christians in general and Catholics in particular seldom actually read the Scriptures in depth, a Scriptural case far more relevant to the current crisis is being overlooked. It is found in the last three chapters of the Book of Judges, which some exegetes have termed darker and more grim than anything in the whole of the rest of the Old Testament. In Judges we read that members of God’s own covenant people defied Yahweh and forced homosexuality on their brethren.
While it’s true that the papacy is in a state of disrepute not seen since the era of Luther and Calvin, this man Jorge Bergoglio who is styled, “Pope Francis,” continues to retain star power in the media, along with the ability to direct the massive resources of the occult Church of Rome in the direction of further revolutionary betrayal of the Gospel.
With reference to the network of cardinals, bishops and priests around the “gay rights” campaign of Francis, dissident Archbishop Carlo Viganó has termed it a “magic circle.” We don’t think he chose those words by accident.
Michael Hoffman is the editor of the periodical Revisionist History® and the author of many books, including Twilight Language, forthcoming in 2021. His work is supported by donations from truth-seekers and the sale of his writings and recordings.