June 12, 2013

The Vatican's Gay Caballeros

As we all know, gays are the most oppressed, powerless people in the history of the world. So, all the examples from history of cabals of gay insiders wielding inordinate power don't fit into the Standard Mental Framework and thus can't be remembered. Any time a gay cabal comes up in the news, it must be treated as a sui generis phenomenon unique to that institution and not as yet another example of a persistent phenomenon. In particular, the latest gay cabal revelation must not be allowed to raise doubts about the Mental Framework that gays are the most oppressed, powerless people in the history of the world.

From the NYT:
Pope Is Quoted Referring to a Vatican ‘Gay Lobby’ 
By RACHEL DONADIO 
ROME — For years, perhaps even centuries, it has been an open secret in Rome: Some prelates in the Vatican hierarchy are, in fact, gay. But the whispers were amplified this week when Pope Francis himself, in a private audience, appeared to have acknowledged what he called a “gay lobby” operating inside the Vatican, vying for power and influence.

Speaking to a meeting of the Latin American and Caribbean Confederation of Religious Men and Women on June 6, Francis discussed a dossier he had received from his predecessor, Benedict XVI. “The ‘gay lobby’ is mentioned, and it is true, it is there. … We need to see what we can do,” Francis said in Spanish, according to a loose summary of the meeting posted on a Chilean Web site, Reflection and Liberation, and later translated into English by the blog Rorate Caeli.

43 comments:

Anonymous said...

o/t, but the Washington Post - or is it the EEOC ? is sooo racist.

"The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on Tuesday accused two major companies of indirectly discriminating against African Americans by using criminal background checks to screen out workers."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/two-companies-accused-of-discriminating-in-hiring/2013/06/11/b4d4f292-c173-11e2-8bd8-2788030e6b44_story.html

Anonymous said...

An institution where unmarried men spend oodles of time with lots of other unmarried men? Why would that be attractive to gays?

The Catholic Church needs to do away with celibacy. Most churches, in fact, would be wise to do away with much of their professional clergy altogether. That may seem unrealistic, but the Mormon Church has done a pretty decent job running their faith with a mostly volunteer clergy comprised of men with day jobs. That way you never feel guilty ejecting a minister who is incompetent or has lost his faith. You should never let church leaders choose themselves.

Anonymous said...

Maybe Steve, or one of the commenters, can direct us to a list of "examples from history of cabals of gay insiders" in various institutions.

Anonymous said...

I personally think that the Catholic church ought to embrace gays, just as they should insist on letting their priests marry (by not letting them do so has an unfortunate tendecy of producing child rapists).

One of the things that is notable in Europe, for example, is that gays are disproportionally voting for right-wing parties that want to limit immigration in large part because they are the closest to the muslim immigrants in the major cities and face major violence.

For example, in Sweden, the general population supports SD by about 8-10%, but gays support it by over 20%, and this includes a lot of minority gays which may underestimate the ethnic gay vote by quite a lot.

You see the same thing in the Netherlands, for instance.

Also, in Israel, where I have family, a lot of gays are right-wing nationalists but at the same time secularists.

Yet the traditional bastions of right-wing institutions alienate this group and pushes them to the far-left who can say, see, they will never accept you! This is a fatal mistake.

Most gays are just normal people. But by pushing them to the margins, the far-left have been able to claim this group for themselves for too long. This is changing in Europe and it's largely an effect of mass immigration. But it shouldn't be an excuse in places where this kind of violence isn't occuring, like in America or Canada.

We can get into the whole discussion of "should gays have children", too. Most of the actual evidence in terms of studies, rather than armchair bigotry, shows that there is no actual difference for how the child develops(nor do you see increased rates of homosexuality, which isn't strange, since it's something you're born with and can't affect).

Speaking as a straight dude from the millenial generation, what I'm saying is probably conventional wisdom to my generation, but it bears repeating to the older and less secure generations who still run the ideological institutions.

Anonymous said...

"The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on Tuesday accused two major companies of indirectly discriminating against African Americans by using criminal background checks to screen out workers."

Well, that is pretty stupid.
Performing criminal background checks won't be illegal, but you won't be able to do it until a bit later, wasting your time and money.

One effect of this is to just ignore black candidates who are likely to be in the register(say, young males without a college degree) alltogether due to this hassle.

But the beaurocrats never think of that.

(Another is to move your business to business-friendly states like Texas, as more and more are doing.)

Anonymous said...

I seem to recall a scene in William Peter Blatty's THE EXORCIST (novel, not film) where one of the characters muses over the non-trivial numbers of homosexuals in the priesthood. As I recall, he was complaining about how this damaged the ability of heterosexual priests to form bonds with one another (i.e., is this guy being friendly or is he coming on to me?).

syon

ATBOTL said...

What percentage of Roman Catholic priests in the USA are gay.

I'd say easily 2/3.

Anonymous said...

o/t, Sailer's Law Of Female Journalism strikes again.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2339299/Jenni-Murray-Presenter-criticises-way-female-performers-marketed-public.html

(Murray presented the BBC feminist citadel Woman's Hour - aka Woman Sour - for twenty-plus years - she also fitted another SWPL stereotype by moving from vibrant South London to leafy, monocultural Cheshire as soon as the children reached high school age)

Anonymous said...

The Vatican II "reform" was made by a lobby of "those you should not name":

http://forward.com/articles/159955/converts-who-changed-the-church/?p=all

Prof. Woland said...

I have always been of the belief, mistaken perhaps, that when the Catholic Church forbade Priests to be married that it was done to prevent hereditary claims against Church assets. I would be curious to know what, if any, role gays had in shaping the policy. By shutting off marriage to Priests, the Vatican became the biggest closet in the world.

Space Ghost said...

Maybe Steve, or one of the commenters, can direct us to a list of "examples from history of cabals of gay insiders" in various institutions.

The Sturmabteilung AKA Brownshirts, Hollywood, Catholic Church, Republican party, etc.

Hunsdon said...

Anonydroid at 1:49 PM said: Maybe Steve, or one of the commenters, can direct us to a list of "examples from history of cabals of gay insiders" in various institutions.

Hunsdon said: Hollywood sounds like a twofer: Gay Jews. Or Jewish gays, whichever.

Could that explain the relative dearth of American "tough guy" actors over the last thirty or forty years?

Sam said...

"Maybe Steve, or one of the commenters, can direct us to a list of "examples from history of cabals of gay insiders" in various institutions."

The Fabians?

Anonymous said...

Example gay cabal - the Cambridge Apostles. I don't know how powerful they were, but they had many distinguished members - Keynes, Wittgenstein, others.

Anonymous said...

What percentage of Roman Catholic priests in the USA are gay.

I'd say easily 2/3.


With those sort of numbers it would be better to talk about a cabal of heterosexual priests within the Vatican.

Kibernetika said...

Ah, where is a modern-day Rabelais to address this? :)

But you've got to wonder if the poor devils aren't succumbing to stereotype threat. Same goes for intrepid NYT reporters, tattooed guys riding fixed-gear bikes in Brooklyn, and social justice types.

Will Papa need to resign or even apologize? What if it leads to a jism schism, with a second dude in Avingon or San Franthisco disseminating his alternative...sermon?





Steve Sailer said...

Bloomsbury was organized by Lytton Strachey as a largely gay cabal to undermine the cultural prestige of the Victorian virtues. See Paul Johnson's "Modern Times" for a lengthy discussion. Or see the hundreds of books praising Bloomsbury for being a gay cabal undermining the Victorian virtues.

Steve Sailer said...

Bloomsbury was an offshoot of The Apostles.

Art Deco said...

I have always been of the belief, mistaken perhaps, that when the Catholic Church forbade Priests to be married that it was done to prevent hereditary claims against Church assets. I would be curious to know what, if any, role gays had in shaping the policy. By shutting off marriage to Priests, the Vatican became the biggest closet in the world.

This is a common misconception. The preference for celibacy emerged quite early, when the Church was still underground and there were few assets. The practice of the eastern Church diverged from the western I believe in the 7th century. Bishops in the eastern Churches are drawn from the ranks of the celibate, however.

A reference to 'gays' in regard to the medieval period is anachronistic.

I'd say easily 2/3.

Why?

The psychologist Richard Sipe (who despises the American priest corps) put the share of non-celibate homosexuals at about a tenth and non-active homosexuals at about a tenth. Other research puts the share of ambiguous, ambivalent, or indifferent priests at about 13%.

Art Deco said...

The Catholic Church needs to do away with celibacy. Most churches, in fact, would be wise to do away with much of their professional clergy altogether

Thanks for your input. How did an institution with 1,900 years of Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture, and the Magisterium ever manage without the insights of the Sailersphere?

anony-mouse said...

I wonder if that leak was really unintentional, unless Frank was really being frank.

Trial balloon?

Anonymous said...

*Thanks for your input. How did an institution with 1,900 years of Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture, and the Magisterium ever manage without the insights of the Sailersphere?*

Those things you mention are completely derived from magical thinking.

Cail Corishev said...

Some people think Benedict abdicated so a new pope could clean house. As JPII's "Rottweiler," he was there when the homosexual abuse scandals were exploding and not nearly enough was being done about them; so while he wasn't personally culpable for anything, he may have felt it would be better handled by a complete outsider. It's a theory; I have no idea whether it's true.

About 5.5% of priests have been accused of sexual abuse from 1950-2002. (You'll sometimes hear 10% thrown around, but that's in certain dioceses, and some dioceses did have a bigger problem with it. When your seminary is called the "Pink Palace," you might have a homosexual problem.) That's accused, not convicted or necessarily guilty. I wouldn't falsely claim to have been molested by a homosexual to get a big pile of money, but some might.

The homosexual cabal happened for two reasons, and neither of them is celibacy. First, the seminaries stopped throwing homosexuals out in the 1950s. Before then, if you made a move on your roommate, you were gone by the next morning. (If you were caught with a girl you were gone too, but that was harder to pull off in a seminary full of men.) They wanted stable, virtuous men, and they understood that homosexuality didn't fit that description.

Second, the Church accepted, like everyone else, the pop psychology notion that homosexuality could be fixed or controlled through therapy, and later (as it became more accepted and fixing it became anti-PC) that a homosexual could be celibate as easily as a heterosexual could. So even when priests were caught committing abuse, they were sent off for therapy and retreats, counseled until they and their therapists were convinced they wouldn't do it again, and put back to work.

Those two factors together allowed the number of homosexuals in the seminaries and priesthood to grow dramatically, and encouraged repeat offenders. Along with that, the number of effeminate and generally disordered men in the priesthood grew, because the homosexuals (and liberal nuns who had taken over the vocations process in many dioceses) pushed masculine, traditional men away from the priesthood. If 10% of priests are homosexual (I could buy that number), that's bad, but having 50%+ of priests be soft, effeminate, liberals might be worse.

The public schools are now run by women and a handful of gamma men and homosexuals. Take away the women, and the men you have left are the kind who were promoted through the seminaries in the 60s through the 80s.

phil g said...

"One effect of this is to just ignore black candidates who are likely to be in the register(say, young males without a college degree) alltogether due to this hassle."

Or young males with self identifying silly names like Da'Rick, Le'Mont, etc.

Anonymous said...

Who says that marriage is incompatible with celibacy? There are many celibate married men that Catholics could recruit their priests from.

Anonymous said...

"The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on Tuesday accused two major companies of indirectly discriminating against African Americans by using criminal background checks to screen out workers."

But wouldn't that be admitting that African Americans commit more crimes than other Americans?

Anonymous said...

Catholic Church forbade Priests to be married that it was done to prevent hereditary claims against Church assets.

I think that is the reason. The priesthood was to be a vocation rather than an inheritable position like, say, the Presidency of the US.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for your input. How did an institution with 1,900 years of Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture, and the Magisterium ever manage without the insights of the Sailersphere?

Don't forget the 1,900 years of The Laying on of Hands:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_laying_on_of_hands#Roman_Catholicism

Anonymous said...

They should change the dress code if they want fewer gays. Most of the gays probably join so they can parade around in dresses and gold and glitter. They should wear overalls or something else that gays wouldn't be caught dead in.

ok said...

Cail corishev, thanks for the insightful comment. There is this tendency for people to think that because we have a gay priest issue now, we have always had one, but only now is it being exposed. As Cail points out, the issue is a dramatic lowering of standards for priests culminating in the 1960's.

Back in the day, becoming a priest was one of a few paths out of a menial labor, hand-to-mouth life. Priest hood was encouraged and pressured by parents who had large families. Many factors played into the drop in quality applicants, but the biggest mistake of the Church was not in dealing with the predatory, gay priests, it was ordaining them in the first place. Even the failure to pull them once accused was symptomatic of the very recent dearth in quality vocations. Of course, there surely have been some throughout the Church's history, but the problem is truly quite modern and I might add now dealt with and largely over.





Anonymous said...

commenter says Catholic Church should drop ban on homosexual activity. This would be difficult as the ban is for the same reason that most contraception is banned: Catholic Church sees homosexual sex and contraceptive sex as "disordered."

The Church would love to say homosexuality is just hunky dory and all the homosexual priests and bishops can come out - and they are a very high percentage of the clergy - but how could the Church keep on humiliating heterosexual married people for wanting to limit family size?

anonyias said...

"The Catholic Church needs to do away with celibacy. Most churches, in fact, would be wise to do away with much of their professional clergy altogether. That may seem unrealistic, but the Mormon Church has done a pretty decent job running their faith with a mostly volunteer clergy comprised of men with day jobs. That way you never feel guilty ejecting a minister who is incompetent or has lost his faith. You should never let church leaders choose themselves."

I agree. I know way too many charismatic slackers who receive sudden "revelations" that they need to be youth ministers.

Mr. Anon said...

"Anonymous Anonymous said...

Maybe Steve, or one of the commenters, can direct us to a list of "examples from history of cabals of gay insiders" in various institutions."

The SA. Broadway and (increasingly) Hollywood. The Cambridge Five (four fifths of whom were homosexual). And - according to Richard Nixon - the Bohemian Grove.

Whiskey said...

Hmmm ... John Wayne. And Samuel Goldwyn. Humphrey Bogart. And Louis B. Mayer. Jimmy Stewart, Henry Fonda, Gregory Peck, Jimmy Cagney, and Jack Warner.

Nope, ultra Jewish Hollywood owned and operated by Jews had lots and lots and lots of tough guy heroes. Heck it lasted through Steve McQueen, James Garner, Charles Bronson, all those guys.

Hollywood, and particularly TV, went ultra female, and anytime you do that you go very, very gay. Women love gays, gays are the ideal non-Alpha male. If women had their way, every non Alpha guy would be turned gay. Of course, gay gay gay now! repels straight men, so male audiences particularly in TV have fled to video games, which dwarf TV revenues.

It is an open question if globalized Hollywood revenues can coexist with the women and gays that run the place now. FABULOUS gay directors/writers are not exactly the kind who can help get you the audience in Beijing or Islamabad.

Anonymous said...

Hollywood, and particularly TV, went ultra female, and anytime you do that you go very, very gay. Women love gays, gays are the ideal non-Alpha male. If women had their way, every non Alpha guy would be turned gay. Of course, gay gay gay now! repels straight men, so male audiences particularly in TV have fled to video games, which dwarf TV revenues.

You know, I think you have something there Whiskey. Attractive women typically attract shy men who get put into the friends zone. It would make sense that such women would want actual friends who like her for who she is rather than just wanting to get in her pants, or marry her.

I am not Spartacus said...

Dear Prof Woland. Old Testament Priests had to be continent during the once-a-year time they served offering sacrifice in the Temple and so it is only logical that Catholic Priests, who offer the Sacrifice daily, be required to be continent/celibate.

Catholic Priests were always required to be continent (see Christian Cochini, S.J. "The Apostolic Origins of Priestly Celibacy') and as early as 385 A.D. Pope Siricius was issuing Decretals demanding his Priests return to the practice of continence (Celibacy as it is now generally known ).

Any idea that sex is an answer to the Capital Sin of Lust is illustrative of just how badly damaged the American intellect is after having been drowned in a tsunami of sex.

The problem of queer clergy is not unique to our days (Saint Peter Damian famously dealt with it earlier) but the will to stamp it out is and that is due to many things, not the least of which is a relaxation of the Rules for fasting and abstinence as it is an iron law of spirituality that a decrease in abstemiousness leads inexorably to an increase in effeminacy

Anonymous said...

Whiskey:"Hmmm ... John Wayne. And Samuel Goldwyn. Humphrey Bogart. And Louis B. Mayer. Jimmy Stewart, Henry Fonda, Gregory Peck, Jimmy Cagney, and Jack Warner.

Nope, ultra Jewish Hollywood owned and operated by Jews had lots and lots and lots of tough guy heroes. Heck it lasted through Steve McQueen, James Garner, Charles Bronson, all those guys.

Hollywood, and particularly TV, went ultra female, and anytime you do that you go very, very gay. Women love gays, gays are the ideal non-Alpha male. If women had their way, every non Alpha guy would be turned gay. Of course, gay gay gay now! repels straight men, so male audiences particularly in TV have fled to video games, which dwarf TV revenues.

It is an open question if globalized Hollywood revenues can coexist with the women and gays that run the place now. FABULOUS gay directors/writers are not exactly the kind who can help get you the audience in Beijing or Islamabad."

I think that Whiskey needs to get laid....fast

NOTA said...

This is probably a small factor, but gay men tend to be drawn to theatrical type jobs--acting, music, ice skating, ballet, etc. In the US, at least, Roman Catholic mass is more theatrical than most protestant services outside of megachurches. And televangelists and megachurch pastors also have a rather high rate of closeted gay ministers, perhaps for the same reason.

Cail Corishev said...

@NOTA,

True. Reason #3854 to return to the Latin Mass: the priest faces the altar instead of the people, so he's more a leader and less a performer.

Anonymous said...

With all the money the Vatican controls, they should fund research on the Gay Germ

Beefy Levinson said...

IANS has it right. Once the first generation of homosexuals became firmly entrenched in the priestly formation process, the will to stamp out the problem evaporated even more. Pope Benedict XVI was raked over the coals for reaffirming Pope John XXIII's absolute ban on homosexuals entering the seminary or novitiate. On top of that, seminary rectors who are themselves gay are disinclined to enforce the ruling.

ATBOTL said...

It's all about celibacy. If it wasn't a requirement, there would be enough quality married men applying that they could easily exclude anyone vaguely suspected of being homosexual or otherwise unsuitable.

Cail Corishev said...

There were plenty of celibate, heterosexual priests before, and there will be again. The traditional orders are full and exanding.

Likewise, there were plenty of celibate sisters before, staffing all the hospitals and schools, and most of them quit when the liberals took over. Now the traditional orders -- the ones that wear habits and stick to traditional roles instead of protesting against nukes or whatever -- are growing fast again.

It's about liberalism, not celibacy.