The Holy See against gender ideology: a danger to humanity. Sex is not a subjective choice

The intervention of the Vatican observer Auza at the UN in New York: “Concern over teaching ideologies to children”, but “no to discrimination”. In recent days, controversy over an alleged opening of the Vatican to the drug that blocks puberty

A danger, a threat to the future – especially of children -, a step backwards for humanity. With explicit harshness the Holy See intervenes, through the Filipino Archbishop Bernardito Auza observer at the UN in New York, against the gender ideology, a theory claiming there is no difference between men and women and their sex can be chosen.

A controversial subject which, for years now, has been the subject of political and ecclesial debates between those who claim that this ideology does not even exist and that it is an invention of conservative fringes of the Church, and the large portions of Catholics engaged in public debate who instead see in this phenomenon a predefined project aimed at the destruction of the “traditional family” and of the “natural order” on which society and its future are founded, and who therefore seek to oppose its insinuations, especially in school education programs.

On more than one occasion the Pope had intervened on the gender ideology issue, explicitly pronouncing the term and stigmatizing it as “ideological colonization”. And on more than one occasion Monsignor Bernardito Auza had also addressed – en passant – the subject in his speeches at the UN headquarters. The speech given on Tuesday 20 March – and reported on the Vatican News site – was instead an in-depth focus that made the Holy See’s stand on the matter even more evident. The archbishop expressed “concern for the teaching of gender ideology to children, so that boys and girls are encouraged to question, from an early age of life, whether they are boys or girls, suggesting that “everyone can choose his or her sex”, but at the same time he strongly reiterated “the dignity and the right not to be discriminated of those who do not feel represented by their biological sex”.

Strong words that come a few weeks after the controversy, sparked and limited to the usual ultraconservative Catholic circles in opposition to of Francis’ pontificate, on an alleged “opening” of the Holy See to tryptoreline, a drug that blocks the development of puberty in adolescents who live the discomfort of “gender dysphoria”. “Opening” given by an interview with Professor Laura Palazzani, a member of the Pontifical Academy for Life, who expressed in the Vatican media a moderate opinion on the drug and its administration, but that according to these circuli minores of detractors, is to be considered a real “betrayal” of the Pope.

Polemics aside, Archbishop Auza – taking the floor at the meeting in question entitled “Gender equality and gender ideology: protecting women and girls”, promoted by the UN to take stock of the situation of women in the world and their rights – wanted to review Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s statements on the issue. Starting with the post-synodal exhortation Amoris laetitia, which in paragraph 56, states that the ideology of gender “denies the difference and reciprocity in nature of a man and a woman and envisages a society without sexual differences, thereby eliminating the anthropological basis of the family”.

“This ideology – we read again in the papal text quoted by the Vatican delegate – leads to educational programmes and legislative enactments that promote a personal identity and emotional intimacy radically separated from the biological difference between male and female… It is a source of concern that some ideologies of this sort, which seek to respond to what are at times understandable aspirations, manage to assert themselves as absolute and unquestionable, even dictating how children should be raised”.

“It needs to be emphasized that “biological sex and the socio-cultural role of sex (gender) can be distinguished but not separated”, stressed the prelate in the wake of the words of the Pope. “On the other hand, “the technological revolution in the field of human procreation has introduced the ability to manipulate the reproductive act, making it independent of the sexual relationship between a man and a woman. In this way, human life and parenthood have become modular and separable realities, subject mainly to the wishes of individuals or couples”.

Auza recalled how once it used to be “clear” the understanding of being a man or a woman: it was a matter of chromosomes. “Today, this clarity has been undermined by the gender ideology that assumes a personal identity unrelated to sex. “It is one thing to understand human frailty or the complexity of life, and another to accept ideologies that claim to divide the inseparable aspects of reality into two,” the archbishop stressed. Substituting this gender identity to biological sex – he added – has strong repercussions “not only in terms of law, education, economy, health, safety, sport, language and culture”, but also “in terms of anthropology, human dignity, human rights, marriage and family, motherhood and fatherhood” as well as on the very fate of women, men and “especially children”.

The Vatican representative then quoted the encyclical Laudato si’, which, in paragraph 155, states that the acceptance of one’s own body “ is vital for welcoming and accepting the entire world as a gift”, whereas “thinking that we enjoy absolute power over our own bodies turns, often subtly, into thinking that we enjoy absolute power over creation”. “ Learning to accept our body, to care for it and to respect its fullest meaning, is an essential element of any genuine human ecology”, wrote the Pontiff in his “green” encyclical. “Valuing one’s own body in its femininity or masculinity is necessary if I am going to be able to recognize myself in an encounter with someone who is different… Therefore, “It is not a healthy attitude which would seek “to cancel out sexual difference because it no longer knows how to confront it”.

Bergoglio had repeated the same concepts verbally to the bishops of Puerto Rico met in June 2015, pointing out that the complementarity of man and woman “is called into question by the so-called gender ideology in the name of a freer and fairer society. The differences between man and woman are not for opposition or subordination, but for communion and generation”.

“When the natural and complementary duality of man and woman is questioned – Monsignor Auza observed – the very notion of human being is undermined. The body is no longer a characteristic element of humanity. The person is reduced to spirit and will and the human being becomes almost an abstraction”.

The Vatican representative also warned against the teaching the gender ideology to children, so that boys and girls are encouraged to question, from the earliest age of their existence, whether they are boys or girls, suggesting that “everyone can choose his or her sex”. “Why do they teach this?” he asked, quoting the Pope again in his speech to the Polish bishops in Krakow in 2016, “Because the books are provided by the persons and institutions that give you money. These forms of ideological colonization are also supported by influential countries. And this is terrible!”.

The prelate concluded his speech by calling for “safeguarding our humanity”, which “means first of all accepting and respecting it as it was created”. Our sex, as well as our genes and other natural characteristics – he said – “are objective data, not subjective choices”.



Moves towards a parish-based ‘apprenticeship’ model of priestly formation would mean the end of the national seminary at Maynooth, a former professor at the college has said.

Calling for prospective clergy to study theology in Trinity College Dublin rather than at St Patrick’s College, Maynooth, Boston College’s Prof. Oliver Rafferty SJ told The Irish Catholic that any parish-based formation model in Ireland would “almost inevitably” have to be focused on Dublin.

“It seems to me that the hierarchy ought to make arrangements with the Department of Theology at Trinity College,” he said. “I know that will strike terror into the hearts of some, but there is a vibrant theological faculty at Trinity, augmented a number of years ago by the Loyola Institute, which specifically aimed to bring Catholic theology into the department at Trinity.”

Fr Rafferty – a former Professor of Ecclesiastical History at Maynooth – comments come following observations from Killaloe’s Bishop Fintan Monahan that parish-based formation could be more practical than current formation methods and would give student priests valuable experience of working side-by-side with laypeople and experienced clergy. Such a model is one possibility up for consideration by a committee tasked with revising the programme of priestly formation in Ireland.

If Ireland’s bishops seriously want to try a parish-based model of priestly formation, it would inevitably mean that Maynooth would effectively “be finished as a training centre for parish seminarians”, Prof. Rafferty said.

“It’s clear that the bishops want to move away from the old idea of seminary formation, and once they do that, if that is what they have decided, then obviously the consequence that flows from that is abandoning Maynooth as a seminary,” he said, adding that while seminaries have worked well in the past as a way of training priests they may not be well-suited to contemporary challenges.

“As an institution for forming priests, I think seminaries may have seen their day,” he said.

Cautioning against emphasising pastoral formation to the detriment of academic formation, however, he said that seminarians need “rigorous exposure” to the academic aspects of theology.

“Apart from anything else, in a society where the laity are increasingly educated, it would be a paradox to say the least if you had in general laity who were better educated than the clergy,” he said.


Of course we know that Maynooth should be closed – even at this stage over the homosexual activity there.

But Father Rafferty also says that the seminary method is outdated.

He may be right?

It would be very healthy for seminarians to study both philosophy and theology in the company of lay students, Male and female.

They would be aso be exposed to wider philosophies and theologies than purely classical philosophy and theology.

Such 6 years of study would also help seminarians to explore their sexuality in a plural environment and make a better decision about celibacy.

The fact that would live in parishes would expose them to everyday issues and parish liturgy and sacraments.

But however, there remains one big issue to resolve – the issue of spirituality/prayer.

It is quite clear that seminarians were given no lasting spirituality and prayer life in Maynooth.

They have to learn to have a prayer and spiritual life that will last when they live alone in parishes.

One way to achieve this would be for priest and people in every parish that becomes a Basic Christian Community in which laity, priests and religious nourish each other spiritually.

They could pray daily together, worship daily and weekly together, engage on regular guided retreats and make pilgrimages together.

The monastic model is not suitable for secular priesthood.

It all has to be retaught.



Niall Gooch 28 March, 2019

Taking of Jerusalem by the Crusaders (1847), by Émile Signol

People who sincerely practise the faith are capable of acts of monstrous wickedness
During the Siege of Jerusalem, at the conclusion of the First Crusade in 1099, a priest led devotions on the Mount of Olives, attended by hundreds of Crusaders. After the Christian armies had captured the city, a thanksgiving procession to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre took place, attended by dozens of priests. In the interim, the Crusaders had murdered thousands of Muslims and Jews.
It is hard to understand how an army marching under the banner of the Cross could act thus. Yet throughout history we are confronted with the unsettling spectacle of Christians who behaved in ways dramatically at odds with the truths of the Gospel.
On one level, of course, all Christians are guilty of this. Equally, there remains something decidedly disturbing in actions carried out by Christians that are not just enormously brutal but systematically and determinedly so.
One needn’t accept the Black Legend of relentless Catholic iniquity to be horrified by the complicity of Catholic individuals and institutions in excessive judicial violence and slavery – and, perhaps worst of all, the cruel mistreatment of Jewish people down the centuries.
Oliver Cromwell was by all accounts a genuine Puritan Christian, a firm believer in his own need for mercy. His New Model Army sang psalms as they went into battle. Yet his conquest of Ireland in the 1650s was appalling. Even if we accept the revisionist accounts that downplay his responsibility for the massacres at Wexford and Drogheda, the subsequent “pacification” of the country – for which Cromwell was ultimately responsible, and which brings to mind Tacitus’s savage aside about creating desolation and calling it peace – was grotesque. Indeed, much British oppression in Ireland, from evictions to extra-judicial murder, was planned and carried out by men who sat in church every Sunday.
Protestant Northern Ireland, in which the government systematically tyrannised its Catholic minority, was run and defended by observant Christians, including clergy. On the other side of the sectarian divide, many leaders of the Provisional IRA were serious Catholics. Martin McGuinness apparently wore a scapular even as the organisation of which he was a leader routinely tortured people to death.
Considering another time and place, I was deeply troubled by Christopher Browning’s Ordinary Men, which describes how an auxiliary police battalion in Nazi Germany slaughtered thousands of Jews, including children. The men were from a reputedly anti-Nazi city, Hamburg, and had largely grown to adulthood before 1933, so had not been indoctrinated in the Hitler Youth. In many cases they were churchgoers. All were offered the chance not to participate. Few took it.
How to account for all this? It would be too easy, I think, to blame cynicism on the part of the individuals, ie to believe that they were only counterfeit Christians. This doesn’t move us on very far, however, and is patently untrue in many cases. No doubt there have been countless people down the ages who have merely pretended to Christian devotion because it gave them opportunities for enrichment and advancement. But as a matter of empirical reality, people who genuinely believe in and practise the faith for sincere reasons are capable of acts of monstrous wickedness. They fail to resist the inhuman pressures from within their own cultures, whether brutal anti-Semitism or cruel norms about the appropriate fate for captured enemy populations.
The question is simultaneously simple and impossible to answer. The obvious answer is that we are scarred by Original Sin, masters of self-deceit and rationalisation. As Kierkegaard said: “We Christians are a bunch of scheming swindlers.”
There is, nevertheless, something a little glib and unsatisfactory about this. We are all burdened by the Fall, but we do not all yield to the undoubted temptation to commit great evils. Some resist in the most heroic fashion. That is where the impossible aspect of the matter comes in. The darkness of the human heart – deceitful above all things, as Jeremiah said – is perhaps the ultimate mystery of human existence. Anyone with even a little self-knowledge will know this. We are all familiar with it from our own small-scale daily battles to choose good over evil.
I’m not a theologian, but I know a little about poetry, and I think one answer – a possible protection against the temptation to enormous evil – lies in something TS Eliot wrote: “The only wisdom we can hope to acquire/Is the wisdom of humility: humility is endless.”
Radical Christian humility, so hard to achieve but visible in the lives of so many great saints, is the opposite of the worldly aspirations and obsessions that so often lie behind great evils; a shield against the dangerous preoccupations of our particular cultures, and against believing our own ideologies are so important that they are worth killing for.
Niall Gooch tweets @niall_gooch



Chilean court orders Catholic Church to compensate victims
In this May 2, 2018, photo, Juan Carlos Cruz, from left, James Hamilton and Jose Andres Murillo, attend a news conference at the Foreign Press Assn. in Rome after meeting Pope Francis in Vatican City. (Domenico Stinellis / Associated Press)

An appeals court in Chile ruled Wednesday that the Roman Catholic Church must pay compensation to three victims of the Rev. Fernando Karadima, the country’s most notorious pedophile priest.

The court in the Chilean capital said that the church must pay about $150,000 each to Juan Carlos Cruz, Jose Andres Murillo and James Hamilton for “moral damage.” It also overturned a lower-court ruling that found no proof of a church cover-up.

The ruling could prompt hundreds of other people who have reported clerical sexual abuses or cover-ups by the Chilean Catholic Church to seek compensation.

“This helps all of us who have lived through this horror, and that’s why we’re happy,” Cruz said on Twitter.

The office of the Santiago Archbishopric said in a statement that it was in “consent” with the court’s decision, and that it “hoped that the ruling will contribute to the process of reparation of the pain suffered by Fernando Karadima’s victims.”

The ruling said that church officials had harmed victims by dismissing their complaints of abuse rather than investigating them.

The Vatican in 2011 sentenced Karadima, a powerful preacher close to Chile’s elite, to a lifetime of penance and prayer for his sex crimes, and Pope Francis defrocked him last year.

During a 2018 trip to Chile, Francis initially dismissed allegations that a bishop had covered up Karadima’s crimes, but the pope later acknowledged “grave errors in judgment” and asked all active Chilean bishops to offer their resignations.

Chilean abuse survivors had long accused Cardinal Ricardo Ezzati and his predecessor in the Chilean capital, Cardinal Javier Errazuriz, of protecting predator priests and discrediting victims.

The ruling on Wednesday named them both. The pope removed Errazuriz last year from his informal Cabinet and he replaced Ezzati on Saturday.

Part of the evidence that led to the ruling included a 2009 letter from Errazuriz to the apostolic nunciature that showed that he was aware of the abuse.

The scandal first erupted in 2009 when victims publicly accused Karadima of molesting them for years. Errazuriz initially shelved an investigation.


Finally, justice for these three long suffering victims, who have shown great courage and perseverance.

Even Pope Francis regarded them as liars, so anxious was he to support his bishop friend who covered up for their abuser.

There are only two things that the RCs don’t like:

1. Widespread exposure of their dark, dark deeds.

2. Having their wealth taken from them by the courts.

But both are set to continue – continuing international exposure and wealth being removed from them by national and international courts.

Add to this dwindling numbers in the pews.

This week the Irish Times carried statistics stating that church attendance has dropped in Ireland from 90% in the 1970s to 30% today.

In another 10 years that will be well below 10%.

I predict that in time to come Italy will overturn the 1929 Concordat and the “holy see” will be a neighbourhood of the City of Rome.




Is it because he is getting fed up of people?

Is it because at  heart he is nasty and mean?

Is it because he has arthritis and his hand is sore?

Is it because he is beginning to suffer from dementia or a mental disorder?

Or is it because he wants to de-mystify the papacy and point to the pope as a servant and not a master?

One thing is sure – his actions are confusing and hurting people and an explanation is needed from Francis himself.

Kissing the pope’s ring (and in the past bishop’s) is a very old custom.

In fact, here in Rome this week, I have had my ring kissed several times. I normally respond by kissing the hands of those who kiss mine – to show mutual affection and respect.

This in is line with Christian teaching that each human being we meet is an alter Christus – another Christ.

If Francis does not want people to kiss his ring he should a public announcement about it and give his reasons.

Or, if he feels that strong about it, he could stop wearing a ring altogether.



safe_image (2)


Dear Bishop Buckley

I emailed you last week about Derry Deacon Declan McGeehan’s comment on Twitter about his view that Anglican priests were “null and void”. He reposted a tweet by the Archbishop of Canterbury who celebrated 25 years of ordination of women to priesthood, and Deacon McGeehan tweeted that Pope Leo XIII was right, Anglican orders are null and void.

I sent an email to the Bishop of Derry, Bishop Donal McKeown saying I saw the tweet and I gave him my concerns over these types of comments, especially since Bishop McKeown and Father Paul Farren have a close friendship with the Church of Ireland Archdeacon Robert Miller. Father Farren even co-wrote a book with Arcdeacon Miller.

Bishop Donal McKeown replied to me, thanking me for pointing this out and that he would take this matter further.

Well today I see Deacon McGeehan’s Twitter account is no more. It is gone, wiped. “Null and void” I will use the term.


Thank you for your email and the information you provide.

It was very fundamentalist and non-ecumenical for the deacon to be insulting another church’s business and reputation.

You were quite right to complain to the bishop.

If McGeehan thinks like that, it raises questions about his suitability for ordination.



SUNDAY’S SUNDAY WORLD carried a story about a recent drugs trial in Ballymena – a case I had a connection with.

In fact I was due to go to court to give evidence on behalf of the police and prosecution – until the man being charged with the crimes changed his plea to guilty.

It all started several years ago when a friend of mine who was a manager in the famous Galgorm Resort and Spa landed at my door in tears one lunch time.


He had foolishly done a deal with a paramilitary drug gang to store a large amount of drugs in his spare bedroom.

They, in turn, were giving him £800 a month for his storage. In total they had paid my friend £5,000.

Then it all went terribly wrong.

My friend’s partner, a China native, stole £25,000 of the drug stash and sold it to the Triad Gang in Belfast.

The paramilitaries came looking for my friend in Cullybackey outside Ballymena and gave him 24 hours to retrieve the drugs or get them £25,000. If he didn’t, they said, they would pour petrol on him and set him alight.

He fled from his home and landed at my door in fear and trembling.

After listening to him, I knew his life was in real danger, and with his permission I rang a senior PSNI officer who dealt with drug crimes.

My friend was taken into “protective custody”.

Later the police asked me if he could spend that night with me and that they would get him safe accommodation. Of course, I agreed.

But when the police arrived at my house in the evening there were armed men waiting in the street and the police car sped away.

My friend recently got a 6 month suspended jail sentence – suspended because he handed himself over to the police, pleaded guilty and gave evidence for the Crown.

However he will never be able to return to Northern Ireland as his life continues to be under threat.

A friend of mine, who also worships at The Oratory every Sunday always says:


And that’s true.





As we left the Vatican the two of were “detained” by The Vatican Carabinieri for 90 minutes and questioned by one of their “commissars”.

They said they objected to my wearing my cross and ring in the Vatican State and demanded I put it in my pocket with my clerical collar.

They said they were acting on instructions from the CDF – Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

They knew my date of birth, the town where I was born etc and asked me to sign a document saying that I would not dress as a bishop again in the Vatican State.

Because my priest friend did not have any photo ID on him they threatened to hand him over to the Italian police for not having ID with him.

They also refused to let my priest friend go to the toilet if he did not accept Vatican police supervision while he was urinating.

During this whole time they kept referring to me as “Your Excellency”.

I asked them if they would do the same to an Anglican bishop visiting the Vatican. The commissar answered : I do not know what we would do in that case. I would just follow orders”.

I asked him if it was a crime to wear my pectoral and ring in the Vatican. He said it was not – but that the CDF did not like it.

They want their religious symbols in our state institutions – but in their own territory, they want to control who uses religious symbols.

Two younger police men escorted us to the border with the Vatican and then said to me: “Now, Your Excellency, you can put back on your episcopal insignia”.

When I did that I got a salute from a Swiss Guard.

When I told a friend of mine back home about it he said: “You would have got a better welcome in North Korea”.


The Vatican clerics and police have protected paedophiles like McCarrick and Casey for decades but get upset with an “irregular” bishop goes to pray at the tome of John XX111 who started Vatican Council 11.

The Vatican criminals should not be allowed by the international and European authorities to have their own rogue state where they can protect episcopal and clerical criminals and hassle other nationalities who visit there.

The Vatican truly is the dwelling place of Satan and his team of devils.

They have even buried the remains of Paedophile Casey in the crypt of Galway cathedral.

They love and protect their own in both life and death.

By the way, the talk here is that John Paul’s remains are in a state of decay.

Hardly a surprise!



Deceased Bishop Eamonn Casey faced at least three allegations of child sexual abuse before he died — with two high court cases being settled.

One of the women who have accused him was his niece, while another received a settlement under the controversial Residential Institutions Redress Board.

Documents obtained by the Irish Mail on Sunday confirmed the Redress settlement, and a second settlement was confirmed by the Limerick Diocese when the Irish Mail on Sunday directly asked them.

Deceased Bishop Eamonn Casey faced at least three allegations of child sexual abuse before he died. Pic: Getty

Patricia Donovan, the niece of the late Bishop Eamonn Casey has claimed she was raped and sexually abused by him from the age of five for more than a decade.

Speaking for the first time, his niece Patricia Donovan, now 56, said: ‘It was rape, everything you imagine. It was the worst kind of abuse, it was horrific. I stopped being able long ago to find any words in the English language to describe what happened to me. It was one horrific thing after another.’

The Irish Mail on Sunday have also revealed that two other complaints of child sexual abuse related to incidents in the 1950s and 1960s.

Ms Donovan, who lives in England, brought her allegations to police in the UK in November 2005, and later to gardai.

Limerick detectives travelled to the UK to take a statement from her in January 2006, but by August of the same year, the Director of Public Prosecutions directed that no charges be brought on 13 sample allegations.

But in the course of seeking documentation relating to her case, Ms Donovan received case notes that confirm that Bishop Casey made a Redress board settlement with a woman in 2005.

The niece of the late Bishop Eamonn Casey has claimed she was raped and sexually abused by him from the age of five for more than a decade. Bishop Casey is pictured with Fr Michael Cleary in Galway in 1979. Pic: Scanned from the NPA archives

Due to restrictions in the redress legislation on information sharing, Gardai or the Director of Public Prosecutions would not have been aware of any such settlement while involved in the investigation, or determination of charges. This is the first time it has ever become public knowledge that Bishop Casey is among those named to the redress board. The Government is now proposing to seal those documents on alleged child abuse in religious institutions for a period of 75 years.

This controversial move by the State, under the Retention of Records Bill, is due to come before the Dail this week.

After Ms Donovan made her allegations to authorities in England, Bishop Casey left England, and was sent back to the Galway diocese.

After Ms Donovan made her allegations to authorities in England, Bishop Casey left England, and was sent back to the Galway diocese.

Canon Kieron O’Brien, Diocese of Arundel and Brighton, has confirmed to the Irish Mail on Sunday that the diocese followed all proper channels at that time, and had Bishop Casey removed from England after Ms Donovan’s allegations.

In 2016, Limerick-based solicitor Tommy Dalton came on record for one woman who took her case against Bishop Casey to the High Court.

However, in the midst of proceedings, Bishop Casey died on March 13, 2017, and the matter was listed as being ‘struck out’ after compensation was paid.

The Limerick Diocese has now confirmed that a settlement was paid to this woman, among three complaints of child sexual abuse brought to their attention between 2001 and 2014.

The Galway diocese confirmed they knew about an allegation that fits Ms Donovan’s – but the Kerry Diocese this weekend refused to be drawn on if they are aware of any allegations against Bishop Casey in their diocese.

Ms Donovan also wrote personally to the then Bishop of Galway, Martin Drennan, after the Galway diocese initially agreed to pay for counselling for her and her two children. The funding later ceased in 2007.

When contacted by the Irish Mail on Sunday, Bishop Drennan said: ‘I can confirm that I was in correspondence with Patricia for a period of time. I heard her plea of suffering and alleged abuse, but I was not in a position to verify any allegations against any named individual.

‘I am very sorry to learn that Patricia is still suffering. I hope she finds peace through forgiveness, as she said is her wish. Though I am now retired, I believe, as Pope Francis said, the Church should reach out to help people find the healing and peace that they deserve, rather than waiting for them to come forward.’

Ms Donovan also contacted a UK based group for abuse survivors founded by Wicklow native Dr Margaret Kennedy.

She told the Irish Mail on Sunday: ‘I was aware of a number of allegations made by several women against Bishop Casey. He was certainly on our radar.’

In 2010, Ms Donovan was also concerned when she learned that Bishop Casey was due to officiate at a baptism of a relative.

She again contacted a number of child protection bodies expressing her concern, and eventually the Bishop of Killaloe, Willie Walsh was contacted, as the Christening was due to be held in his diocese.

Contacted by the Irish Mail on Sunday, Bishop Walsh, 84, who has also retired, said: ‘I can confirm that I advised Eamonn that he should not do the Baptism.’


We now know that Bishop Eamon Casey was a child rapist!

When the Annie Murphy case broke church defenders said that Casey was “normal” and involved with a female adult.

But people did not know that Casey was a child rapist and paedophile.

But the hierarchy knew and still made him the bishop of Kerry and later Galway.

So they deliberately made a known paedophile and child rapist a bishop!

It shows the utter depravity of the Irish and global hierarchy.

And they even gave him the honour of being buried in Galway cathedral bishop’s crypt!.

How many more Irish bishops are sexual perverts?

I am in Rome to deal with another case of Irish Episcopal perversion.

Today I will be raising the Casey child rape at the highest level.

But of course it will be “no comment”.

We are dealing with a global situation of RC abuse and rape.



Yesterday an elderly Roman nun stopped on the street, to tell me angrily that she did not approve of Pope Francis.

In the above picture she is pointing at The Vatican as she goes into a tirade about the Pope and the current state of the church

I was sitting at a cafe near the Vatican walls having an early morning Aqua Frizzante when she approached me.

As she spoke fast and in Italian I did not understand much of what she said.

She appeared to be in her late 70s and I imagine she has given 50 or 60 years to the church and and is now disillusioned by all the terrible scandals.

Of course she is not alone. Many elderly people are disillusioned by the corruption and scandals.

So many elderly people have said to me – “When I go Mass now I keep wondering all during the Mass where the priest where the priest and his hands were last night”

It reminded me of a true story I heard from a priest’s mistress one time.

She slept with him several times a week and attended his Mass everyday.

When she went to Communion, instead of saying “the Body of Christ, he’d say “Christ, what a body”!

That level of cynicism is shocking

Many Catholics are angry and disillusioned.

Looking at the size and pomp of The Vatican this week I just know, deep in my heart and soul, that Jesus never intended any of it.

How did we ever get from Bethlehem and Narareth to The Vatican and it’s great wealth?

In Jesus God walked with men and women.

The Vatican is the symbol of what happens when men walk away from God.



BILGRIMAGE BLOG Wednesday, March 20, 2019


More on Frédéric Martel’s In the Closet of the Vatican: The Dark Heart of Martel’s Story — Corruption of Pretend Heterosexuality Coupled with Abominable Treatment of Queer People
I have now made my way about halfway through Frédéric Martel’s In the Closet of the Vatican, trans. Shaun Whiteside (London: Bloomsbury, 2019), and am finding the book grim going. It’s, as many commentators have noted, eye-popping, and overwhelming in the detail with which it tells — and documents — its story of corruption. To quote Mary Oliver in her poem “The Chance to Love Everything,” this is for me the dark heart of the story here: it’s a story of incredible corruption running through the governing structures and clerical culture of a major Christian institution, a story that does a very convincing job, I think, of rooting that corruption genetically in the intense homophobia of the governing elite of this institution.
This passage leaps out at me:

It was when I met the cardinals, bishops and priests who worked with him that I discovered the hidden side – the dark side – of his very long pontificate. A pope surrounded by plotters, thugs, a majority of closeted homosexuals, who were homophobes in public, not to mention all those who protected paedophile priests.
“Paul VI had condemned homosexuality, but it was only with the arrival of John Paul II that a veritable war was waged against gays,” I was told by a Curia priest who worked at John Paul II’s ministry of Foreign Affairs. “Irony of history: most of the players in this boundless campaign against homosexuals were homosexual themselves” (p. 194).

This is an important passage, it seems to me. Due to the intense adulation of many media folks of the rock-star pope John Paul II, few commentators have been willing to touch the corruption that surrounded him in his papal court — and the quite specific source of that corruption in the intense, vicious homophobia of many of the corrupt men surrounding John Paul II, who themselves had homosexual secrets in many cases.

While hiding those homosexual secrets, they chose to mount war against the queer community, combating its rights, scapegoating LGBT people — especially for the abuse crisis in the church — and targeting theologians calling for compassionate outreach to queer people.

So much of the corruption in the church right now is rooted in this historical matrix of the papacy of St. John Paul the Great — though it may take many years before people who are no longer blinded by the rock-star glitz of that image-savvy pope to recognize this.

And then there’s this grimly funny passage in Martel’s book:

For conservatives, lending credence to Viganò’s testament meant shooting themselves in the foot, while at the same time risking involvement in a civil war where any means were permitted. There are probably more closeted homosexuals on the right than on the left of the Church, and the boomerang effect would be devastating (p. 52).

Homophobic hard-right Catholics were initially deliriously happy that Viganò was bashing the gays and exposing the gays inside the hierarchy.

Then they realized that the gays included them and their heroes, and they had walked into a trap.

Bash McCarrick, and you immediately have to confront the fact that St. John Paul the Great elevated him to powerful positions — having received reports, we now know, about McCarrick’s sexual propensitiies and activities.

It’s hard to bash the gays in the church when you have people like Raymond Burke at your helm, and when your papal heroes — St. John Paul the Great and Benedict XVI — were surrounded by gobs and gobs of right-wing gay hierarchs.

The commentary of Louis Cornellier in his essay about Martel’s book “L’Église survivra-t-elle à Sodome?”seems to me right on target. Cornellier writes,

[Martel writes,] “Derrière la majorité des affaires d’abus sexuels, suggère-t-il, se trouvent des prêtres et des évêques qui ont protégé les agresseurs en raison de leur propre homosexualité et par peur qu’elle puisse être révélée en cas de scandale. La culture du secret qui était nécessaire pour maintenir le silence sur la forte prévalence de l’homosexualité dans l’Église a permis aux abus sexuels d’être cachés et aux prédateurs d’agir.”
Martel montre même que cette culture du silence, à son apogée sous les règnes de Jean-Paul II et de Benoît XVI, explique en partie une foule de malversations financières vaticanes, les compromissions de divers cardinaux avec les dictatures argentine, chilienne et cubaine et la répression de la théologie de la libération dont les grandes figures, note Martel, ‘étaient des religieux manifestement non gays’ alors que leurs adversaires ‘étaient, eux, des homophiles ou des homosexuels pratiquants.

[My rough translation: “Behind the majority of cases of sexual abuse, he (a priest interviewed by Martel) suggests, can be found priests and bishops who have protected the abusers due to their own homosexuality and out of fear that it might be revealed as scandal. The culture of secrecy that has been necessary for maintaining silence about the overweening prevalence of homosexuality in the church has permitted sexual abuse cases to be kept hidden and predators to prey.”

Martel shows, even, that this culture of silence, at its zenith in the papal reigns of John Paul II and Benedict XVI, helps in part to explain a plethora of embezzlement cases in the Vatican, the compromised behavior of several cardinals involved with dictatorships in Argentina, Chile, and Cuba, and the repression of liberation theology, the chief promoters of which, Martel notes, “were religious who were manifestly not gay,” while their adversaries “were themselves homophlies or practicing homosexuals.”]

It’s not the corruption of homosexuality itself, then. It’s not, as we’ve been told for far too long by these very same people in the bosom of the church, the (non-existent) corruption of having a homosexual sexual orientation, of having been shaped queer by God’s hands.

It’s the corruption of pretend heterosexuality coupled with abominable treatment of queer people — all engineered by homosexual clerics posturing as heterosexual — that’s the very dark heart of the corruption within the Catholic institution. So much of the corruption — real corruption, as in Vatican financial shenanigans and policies throwing progressive priests in Latin America to murderous wolves — begins with this dark heart of the story.

While people’s attention has been diverted to the non-existent corruption of simply having a gay sexual orientation, real, toxic corruption has spread through the Catholic institution as closeted, hateful gay clerics have attacked open, self-accepting gay people, while pretending to uphold and live by moral rules they themselves do not live by at all, those mounting these ugly attacks.

And here’s the nadir of this approach to being Catholic at this point in history:

His [Marcial Maciel’s] way of life was also highly unusual for the times – and for a priest. This father – who showed absolute humility in public, and great modesty on all occasions – lived privately in an armoured apartment, stayed in luxury hotels on his foreign travels and drove incredibly expensive sports cars. He also had false identities, kept two women by whom he would have at least six children, and had no hesitation in abusing his own sons, two of whom have since registered complaints against him.
In Rome, where he went often in the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s, he was welcomed as a humble servant of the Church by Paul VI and as a guest star by his “personal friend” John Paul II (p. 234).

Put the title “Saint” in front of John Paul’s name here, and you’ll see starkly what I mean by corruption running through the Catholic institution, but especially its clerical club — corruption directly related to the attempt to stigmatize as corrupt every human being in the world shaped queer by God’s hands. While the very persons disseminating that toxic message making queer people susceptible to scorn and violence are tightly guarding their own homosexual secrets ….


John Paul 11 was guilty of the most appalling crimes of cover up of abuse criminality.

He was not fit to be a modern saint.

He was a major cover up merchant.

He was an abuse cover upper.

He is no saint.

He was a truth cover upper and a liar.

He is now a disgraced politician.

May he be recognised as a political failure