Archbishop Annibale “Bugsy” Bugnini

Archbishop Annibale Bugnini, Titular Archbishop of Diocletiana, 1972-1982.

Annibale is the Italian name for “Hannibal”, the Carthaginian general who was the hero of the Second Punic War (213-208 BC) and the fiercest enemy of ancient Rome. (1)

Bugnini was the titular (2) archbishop of Diocletiana (3), a name from history that should strike fear into the heart of Christians. The persecution of the Roman emperor Diocletian (4) was the last of the Christian persecutions in ancient times and was known as “the Great Persecution” due to its ferocity.

-------------

NOTES:

(1)  Hannibal was a famed military strategist who brilliantly marched his army, which included war elephants, from Spain over the Pyrenees and the Alps into Italy in the campaign against Rome and occupied most of Italy for 15 years. He was defeated by Scipio Africanus in the Battle of Zama in 202 BC using many of the strategies that the Romans had learned from him. The ancient city of Carthage (near modern day Tunis) was known for its idolatrous religion of child sacrifice.

(2)  Titular dioceses are those ancient dioceses which had fallen into the hands of infidels (in partibus infidelium) and which no longer constitute an actual physical diocese governed by a resident bishop. The names of these essentially vacant dioceses are only used as titles, hence the term “titular”, for certain prelates who are appointed bishops or archbishops without an actual diocese to govern, i.e., vicars Apostolic, auxiliary bishops, administrators Apostolic, nuncios, Apostolic delegates.

(3)  The ancient diocese of Diocletiana was in the Roman province of Dardania, modern day Macedonia, and generally encompassed the modern city of Skopje.

(4)  Though not the first Roman Emperor to persecute Christians (e.g., Nero, Decius, Valerian) Diocletian (r. 284-305) styled himself a “religious reformer” over against the rising influence of Christians in the Roman Empire. He sought to reestablish the old pagan religion and worship in the Empire. He first purged the military of Christians and then beginning in A.D. 303 issued a series of decrees outlawing Christianity, effectively forcing Christians into idolatrous worship, for which the penalty of refusal was jail, destruction of Scriptures and churches, confiscation of property, torture, and death. The persecution was the last and most severe persecution in the Roman Empire against Christians and is known as “the Great Persecution” in history books. It was only effectively ended by the “Edict of Milan” in A.D. 313 and the ascension of Constantine who legalized and authorized Christianity for the whole of the Roman Empire.

Asperges Me Domine - Traditional Latin Mass Hymns

And to think that in 1969, the Roman Catholic world threw away the most beautiful liturgical music the world had ever known for the complete trash heard at the Novus Ordo today.

So who was the genius who decided that lounge-lizard music should enter the temple of God?

2,600 religious leave orders annually over homosexuality, ‘women’s ordination’

From LifeSiteNews:

by Hilary White, Rome Correspondent

ROME, November 8, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) – According to figures compiled by the Vatican, more than 2,600 priests and consecrated female religious leave their orders every year – and the office that oversees religious life has cited lack of fidelity to the Church’s sexual teachings and disagreement over the reservation of priestly ordination to men as a leading reason.

In all, 13,123 men and women were dispensed formally from their vows in religious life, a requirement for returning to the lay state, between 2008 and 2012. The annual average is 2,624.6.

The Secretary of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life, Archbishop José Rodríguez Carballo, cited “emotional problems” including “falling in love” in heterosexual relationships which sometimes “culminate in marriage.” But he also noted the “violation of the vow of chastity,” including with “repeated acts of homosexuality – more evident in men, but equally present, more than you think, among women.”

Many religious, he said, suffer a “loss of sense of belonging to the Church,” and this “lack of true communion...is manifested, among other things, in not sharing the Church’s teaching on specific issues such as the ordination of women and sexual morality.”

At a meeting in Rome late last month, Archbishop Rodríguez, lamented, “In a world where everything is soft, there is no place for sacrifice, nor by renunciation, or other similar values.”

The “absence of a spiritual life” – meaning “personal prayer, community prayer and sacramental life” and the “loss of sense of belonging to the community” – leads ultimately “to a profound crisis of faith,” he added.

The numbers, said Archbishop Rodríguez, indicated a possible change in the Church’s Canon Law saying that the law as it is “does not allow us to have longer novitiates in order to permit better discernment.” Nevertheless,” he said, “it’s appropriate to say that it is almost impossible to accurately detect these root causes,” due to a lack of “fully reliable data.”

Further, most people in Western countries come from a culture that precludes long-term commitment, one the archbishop compared to “zapping” from one television channel to another. “The first thing obvious to all is that we are in a world in profound transformation,” he said.

Following the close of the Second Vatican Council, one of the most notable, and alarming, features of the Catholic landscape was the mass “exodus” of thousands of consecrated religious, who left their orders, at the same time that religious orders started “experimentally” abandoning their habits and traditional practices like life in common and daily, scheduled prayer times.

In his October 29 address, however, Archbishop Rodríguez did not mention the growth of a movement within the religious life to push against the trends, and retain their customs and traditions. Dozens of small communities have either been founded or reformed in the last 20 years to bring back, in accordance with the instructions of the Second Vatican Council, those aspects of religious life – most prominently deliberate adherence to the Church’s moral teachings – that were lost or abandoned.


In a decision seen by many as a powerful symbol, in 1993 the Poor Clares of Perpetual Adoration, made famous as the community of ETWN founder Mother Angelica, moved from a modified, short-skirted habit, to the enveloping outfit that had been traditionally associated with sisters before Vatican II.

Another world-famous, and instantly recognizable, community are the Missionaries of Charity, founded by Mother Theresa of Calcutta whose strict regimen of asceticism and care for the “poorest of the poor” around the world – including lepers – has never dampened the enthusiasm of the hundreds of women who apply around the world.

One of the most prominent and well known of these groups are the Dominican Sisters of Mary, Mother of the Eucharist, a teaching order founded in 1997, who have been featured as “young and rapidly expanding” on Oprah and dozens of other television and print news outlets in the U.S. These sisters have announced that, having outgrown their recently completed motherhouse in Ann Arbor, Michigan, they will be opening two new houses of formation in Texas and California.

The sisters are part of an umbrella organization for female religious, the Council of Major Superiors of Women Religious, (CMSWR) that was formed as an answer to the extreme liberalization of the older group, the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR), that is currently under doctrinal investigation by the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

In opposition to LCWR organisations, CMSWR groups have as their basic principle their loyalty to Catholic doctrine and the Vatican’s authority and to the ancient traditions of the religious life. All of the groups wear some form of recognizable religious habit, live the traditional common life and engage in works that have always been associated with Catholic sisters such as teaching, nursing and prayer. They are also attracting large numbers of young women.

Sister Thomas Augustine, director of California Mission Advancement for the Ann Arbor Dominicans recently told Catholic San Francisco magazine, “We had 22 young women enter in August, and we have had between 10 and 20 new vocations per year for the past five years.”

“It has happened to us before that by the time we finished adding onto the motherhouse in Ann Arbor we were already out of room! This time we are hoping to stay ahead of things so we are planning for two new houses of formation.”  

John Paul "The Great," Patron Saint of Altar Chicks

Altar Boys and the Priesthood

Next year will mark twenty years since the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments formally permitted girls to serve the altar at Mass. There are few topics which can generate as much discussion and debate as this one.
For years the faithful have been told that altar girls do not negatively impact priestly vocations. Indeed, far to many have approached this simply as a matter of “gender-equality” for young girls. Some even argue that the Church has spoken and it is time to accept this decision and move on. Nothing could be further from the truth. 

Born Out of Dissent
First we need to clarify that this is strictly a discussion of Church discipline and not an issue of doctrine. As with several other contemporary crisis, the practice of girls serving the altar was born out of dissent. Despite clarifying statements from Rome in both 1970 and again 1980 the liturgical abuse still continued. With the revision of the Code of Canon Law in 1983 the opportunity for change presented itself.

From the point of view of liturgical law, an official interpretation of Canon 230, Paragraph 2, of the Code of Canon law…led to a 1994 letter from the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments clarifying that girls may serve at the altar. But bishops are not bound to permit them to do so…
(Zenit News Agency. “Female Altar Servers”. 3 February 2004)

It is also important to note, however, that the same 1994 letter from the Congregation also stated that:

(T)he Holy See wishes to recall that it will always be very appropriate to follow the noble tradition of having boys serve at the altar. As is well known, this has led to a reassuring development of priestly vocations. Thus the obligation to support such groups of altar boys will always continue.

Much like the excessive use of Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion, which I have blogged about previously, it is astonishing just how quickly altar girls serving at Mass became the norm. To date only the Diocese of Lincoln, Nebraska has never implemented the use of altar girls at Mass in the United States. 

Priestly Vocations
Regardless of what anyone contends this is not an issue of gender equality. Indeed, no one has a right to serve at the Mass. As a father of five, four of whom are girls, the equality argument rings hollow to me. To discuss altar girls under the banner of equality is to impose a false, secular, notion of participation into the sacred and eternal realm of the liturgy. We all participate in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, regardless of what our role is or isn’t. 

There are two vitally important questions that we need to be asking:
First, shouldn’t we do all that we can to assist young men discern a possible calling to the priesthood? 

Secondly, if we determine that young men are more likely to discern a vocation to the priesthood by being an altar server, shouldn’t we seek to increase their participation? 

I have often heard that there isn’t much data to support the argument that altar serving leads young men to the priesthood. This is uniformly untrue. 

For several years now the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate (CARA) has conducted an annual Survey of Ordinands to the Priesthood with typical response rates between 65-75 percent. Questions address such topics as ordinands age, ethnicity, siblings, education and participation in parish ministries. 

Of these hundreds of men surveyed (who have since been ordained to the priesthood) an overwhelming majority were altar servers during their formative years. Surveys over the last four years provide the following numbers:
In the 2010 survey 70 percent of the 339 respondents had been servers.
In the 2011 survey 71 percent of the 329 respondents had been servers.
In the 2012 survey 75 percent of the respondents had been servers.
Finally, in the 2013 survey 67 percent of the 366 respondents had been altar servers.

This is incredibly relevant data which should receive much more attention when discussing this topic.

(Pictured above: Altar Guild of St. Stephen the First Martyr Catholic Church, Diocese of Sacramento)

A Return to the Noble Tradition
In July 2005, Catholic World Report published priestly vocation statistics from the previous year for the United States. Conducted 10 years after Rome officially permitted girls to serve altar, it is interesting to note what the survey revealed. The previously mentioned Diocese of Lincoln, NE (who had never implemented girl altar servers) led the entire nation with one seminarian per 2,625 Catholics.

In the intervening years we have begun to see a modest, but consistent, increase in parishes reverting back to a boys only policy for altar serving. The basic reasoning goes something like this:

Boys want to serve with other boys.
Returning to the noble tradition of only boys serving at the Mass facilitates greater participation by young men.
These young men, through their years of service, are then assisted in their formation and discernment for a possible calling to the priesthood.

From this we then see a steady and consistent growth in men entering the seminary and eventually more men ordained to the priesthood.
Father John Hollowell over at his On This Rock blog has done a great service by conducting a survey of several parishes which have made the switch from co-ed servers to male only. The below chart and data are courtesy of Fr. Hollowell’s research. While the sample size is small it is still difficult to argue with an average increase of 450 percent in boys serving altar.

Another Success Story
I would like to conclude with a success story close to home for me. My own parish of St. Ann’s in Charlotte, North Carolina. When current pastor Father Timothy Reid arrived in 2007 the parish had approximately 25 total servers (boys and girls). Beginning the very next year he did not permit any new girls to serve, only grand-fathering in those who were already serving. So what happened next? 

In 2008 St. Ann’s began to see a sharp increase in the numbers of servers. From 25 co-ed servers the year before the parish increased to about 35 male only servers. Since several girls had quit as well, the 35 servers reflects a near doubling of male servers that very first year. 

Additionally, Father Reid began offering the Latin Mass that year, for which there was added 10 more boys to exclusively serve at that Mass. 

Since 2009, with both Novus Ordo and Latin Mass servers combined, the parish typically has between 40-50 boys serving at a given time. Simultaneously St. Ann’s has seen a consistently high level of young girls who participate in the St. Maria Goretti Altar Guild. 

Father Reid recently reflected on some of the blessings St. Ann’s has experienced since reinstating male only altar servers:

I think what’s interesting for our parish is that since we’ve separated the boys and girls, both are happier in their duties.
Moreover, we’ve had two girls who’ve participated in the Maria Goretti Altar Guild go into religious/consecrated life, and three young men head off to the seminary.
We’ve got another young man slated for the seminary next year. And I’m quite sure that many of my (current) altar boys are considering the seminary.

In the coming years it is my sincere hope that more parishes, and even possibly dioceses, take a serious and prayerful second look at their policy for altar serving. Let us remove the emotions, polemics and agendas from this discussion and simply seek what is best for the priesthood and for Holy Mother Church.

Pope Francis and the Latin Mass: Summorum Pontificum Pilgrimage to Rome

What Has Happened to the Catholic Mass?

From The Remnant:

A Letter from a Recent Lutheran Convert

Nate Metzger
GUEST REMNANT COLUMNIST
Why Does This Lutheran Service Look More Catholic Than Our Mass?   Dear Folks at The Remnant: I've been a lurker to your website for a while, and a subscriber to your fine newspaper for a few months now. Your paper has been a continual source of clarity and....well, sanity.  You mentioned in a recent YouTube shtick (it was with Matt and Ferrara), that you were going to devote future YouTube conversations to the problem of the New Mass. It made me think of my own case. I'm a recent convert to Catholicism from 'confessional' (read: traditionalist) Lutheranism, and it's been disillusioning being on this side of the Tiber. Being raised confessional Lutheran, I of course know my Lutheran catechism very well (I could probably recite most of it by memory even now), and for that reason, I find the Paul VI Rite bizarre. In the New Mass, there's nothing particularly Catholic-specific about the content of the orations. If anything, it seems rather 'neutral' and 'happy' in tone, in that not only is it purged of Catholic-specific dogma, but references to sin, death, hell, Satan's works, and the warring angels, have been omitted.  By comparison, my old Lutheran Mass's orations were chalk full of allusions to this 'hard' stuff.  Moreover, some of the words in the new Mass's Canon—including the 'Blessed are you Lord' prayer, strike my former Lutheran ears as doctrinally suspect. My Lutheran friends find that prayer especially weird, and they argue that it cheapens the Real Presence. I have a hard time disagreeing. At the very least, no confessional Lutheran pastor would ever say such a prayer before the consecration in a Lutheran Mass. No. Way. Compare this with the Traditional Latin Mass—the Mass that Luther objected to and which was the foil for my own childhood catechesis. Most prayers in this older Mass contain doctrines and ideas that are highly offensive to my former Lutheran ears—propitiatory sacrifice, the merits of the saints, purgation, etc. All over the place in the changing orations of this Mass, you find ideas and doctrines that make me think, "Yeah, there's no way I could pray this as a Lutheran. Way too Catholic." I hardly ever think that when I read/hear the orations of the new mass. Add to this the fact that the Old Mass has that great Eucharistic Prayer in the Canon ("Accept, O Holy Father, Almighty and Eternal God, this spotless host...), which is totally offensive to Lutherans. That prayer, of course, was axed from the New Mass.  Bonkers, from my perspective. I just don't get it. So there's a weird irony for this former confessional Lutheran.  Certainly, a confessional Lutheran has to avoid the old Mass like the plague, in that it is chalk full of doctrines that are, for a Lutheran, Catholic-specific (read: heretical). Then again, the Paul VI rite is also unsuitable for Lutheran worship; but ironically, this isn't because it contains Catholic-specific dogma (because it doesn't), but because it it's too soft on sin, hell, the warring angels, and the evil work of Satan.  Then, of course, there's the way a new Mass is 'celebrated'. Some of my old Lutheran friends talk about how the Catholic church 'jumped the shark' at Vatican II, and it shows in the way the new Mass is offered. Imagine a confessional Lutheran kid today, learning his catechism, visits a Novus Ordo Mass for the first time. In addition to hearing the 'neutral' and 'happy' prayers, this young Lutheran kid will see things he's never seen before in his own Lutheran church: people standing for communion receiving in the hand, chatty and irreverent priests and laity, ad-libbing, altar girls, lay readers (including women), disposable hymnals, lay administers of communion, priests walking around the sanctuary during the sermon, and loud and obnoxious cantors (singing a lame responsorial psalm from the pulpit, no less!).   He'll also notice that, as compared to his own Lutheran church that sees Zwingli as an enemy, the Catholic church he is visiting seems purged of icons and crucifixes. Moreover, here at the Catholic church, none of the men have suits and ties on, and everyone is talking before Mass begins. And yes: lots of bad, bad, idiotically bad, insultingly horrendously bad, dear-God-how-is-it-possible-for-it-to-be-this-bad? bad, music. Insanely bad. Our young Lutheran visitor finds it odd that he knows by heart more hymns by Thomas Aquinas than these Catholics do. At any rate, our young Lutheran visitor is sorely confused after attending his first Catholic Mass. As it turns out, his little confessional Lutheran church is by far the most 'conservative' and 'traditional' church in town.  Most strangely, our young Lutheran visitor finds the Catholics to be heretics. Yet, these Catholics don't want to return the compliment. 'Oh, same difference!' they say to him.  Now, back to the fact that you guys are a source of sanity for me. As a convert (who gets the 'same difference' line constantly upon mentioning that I'm a convert), I'm always interested to get Catholic opinion on these changes. But on most major Catholic blogs and media outlets, the answer I get is that I'm a 'radical traditionalist' simply because I suggest that there are huge discrepancies between the two Masses, or because I don't understand why they would introduce such lame music, or because I think that the new Mass is doctrinally weak. Thing is, I don't usually attend a traditional Latin Mass. It's too far away. And anyway, I'm new to this Catholic thing. I don't really know what it means to be a traditionalist. I'm still learning.  I'm just wanting people to see that something really weird is going on in the prayers of the new Mass. Given that I'm new, I figured I'd be able to get some easy answers to my confusions from seasoned Catholics. But no one seems to care...even if they agree with me (and they usually don't). The issue, I'm told, is with me. I've been told that I'm a heretic, moreover, because I don't accept the idea that everything is totally fine.  Bonkers. What a relief to find The Remnant! You seem to be saying many of the things I'm thinking. It's nice to know my intuitions aren't off base.  At any rate, I thought of this all, given your mention of a talk on the Mass in a future YouTube broadcast.  Best, and thanks for what you do. Sorry for writing a book here. ...A Remnant Reader

Is My Taste in Art Reliable?...and How About Yours?

From New Liturgical Movement:
by David Clayton

No doubt many who read this  will offer a sharp No! in answer to the first question. (In case you're wondering I can't stand the picture left.) But suppose you disagree with my judgment when I say that I think a work of art is good - can we say who is right and who is wrong? If we look to Church for guidance here it doesn't seem very helpful at first.

The Church doesn't set out, to my knowledge, any hard and fast rules for what is appropriate style of imagery for our worship. This is a frustration to some, who wish that there were some so we could get rid of all the ugliness and sentimentalism. While to others it is their cue to allow just about anything into our churches and create the disaster of the last 50 years. If we lived in a time when the tradition of painting sacred art was still strong and living, then there probably wouldn't be any question in most people's minds, we would just happily and unquestioningly follow the current trend that and get on with it.

But we don't, and therefore in choosing images for the liturgy or for the 'domestic church' or prayer corner, there will be an element of personal taste involved. The fact that the Church does not stipulate a cannon of approved style leaves room both within existing traditions for personal responses and tastes, the flourishing of local variations and the possibility development of new styles that nevertheless sit within the bounds of what defines that tradition; and beyond that it also gives room for the development of styles that are so distinct that they would represent the establishment of a whole new tradition. I anticipate that any new style, perhaps one that marks our era, will start with one maverick artist who goes against the grain and who, it turns out, produces something that is recognised by those who choose art for our churches and other artists as capturing something that speaks to a particular need of the time.

This was recognised by Pius XII in Mediator Dei: 195. "Recent works of art which lend themselves to the materials of modern composition, should not be universally despised and rejected through prejudice. Modern art should be given free scope in the due and reverent service of the church and the sacred rites, provided that they preserve a correct balance between styles tending neither to extreme realism nor to excessive "symbolism," and that the needs of the Christian community are taken into consideration rather than the particular taste or talent of the individual artist. Thus modern art will be able to join its voice to that wonderful choir of praise to which have contributed, in honor of the Catholic faith, the greatest artists throughout the centuries. Nevertheless, in keeping with the duty of Our office, We cannot help deploring and condemning those works of art, recently introduced by some, which seem to be a distortion and perversion of true art and which at times openly shock Christian taste, modesty and devotion, and shamefully offend the true religious sense. These must be entirely excluded and banished from our churches, like "anything else that is not in keeping with the sanctity of the place."

Clearly from the latter part of the quote above, he is not saying 'anything goes' either. But how can we discern the difference? Freedom can be misused and so if we are going to look outside the traditions forms, we should be cautious. For the further we stray from traditional forms, the greater the chance of us mistakenly choosing the ugly, the superficial, the sentimental and the kitsch even if we can't see it ourselves. It is always worth taking into account that none of us should trust our taste absolutely - I therefore use the principle that in choosing art for public consumption, I will not stray outside the forms of the liturgical traditions of the Church. As NLM readers will know I accept the authority of Pope Emeritus Benedict when he states that there are three - the iconographic, the gothic and the baroque 'at its best' (the 17th century and extending further for some artists). In following this guidance therefore, we should not only be careful in accepting modern forms, but also those of the High Renaissance and naturalistic tradition of the 19th century (and artists such as Bougeureaux) which he does not include in his list of liturgical forms. Nevertheless, no one can rule out all artists from any particular era for even in the worst of times, there are likely to be individuals who are inspired and worthy of attention.

Let us suppose for a moment, though, that despite all of this I am drawn to something that is non-traditional and which, I am convinced, is good, true and beautiful nevertheless. How do I know I'm right and that this is an exception to the general guidelines given above? Every single one of us must be prepared to consider the possibility that to some degree at least, the judgments we are making are flawed. How can I tell? First of all I regardless of how much I like something I do my best to avoid anything that looks, very distorted and ultra modern in style - the chances are that these are not good for prayer. Similarly even if things seem skillfully drawn, if there is a sugary sentimentalism to the image or it looks 'kitsch' then avoid it. Then I find that asking the questions such as the following will help:

Does it reflect truth? Here I am considering if the content is reflective of what I know to be true. Does it conform to the gospel account of a scene, for example?

Is this beautiful? It might seem a statement of the obvious to put this in here, but it is surprising how often I might decide that I am drawn to something which I can't actually say that I think that it is beautiful.

Would I like to spend eternity with this? I got this question from a book by the architect Christopher Alexander who found that if you asked people for their preferences based upon different ways of asking the same question you got different answers. He found that because people have differing ideas of what constitutes beauty, you get less conformity of response than if you ask people to consider the same thing but by thinking about what the properties of beauty are. I thought this one was ingenious.

Do I like it? We don't want to eliminate personal taste altogether. Once I have got past the first set of questions then while these will not infallibly lead me to what is good and true and beautiful, it will at least increase the chances. Then I will choose something that I like. The good is, after all, the desirability of being and so at some level I have to think about how desirable something is if I am considering how good it is.

Bad or good? Bougeureau, Michelangelo and Botticelli from the 19th century and the Renaissance; and the 20th century artist Marc Chagall.

A Meditation on the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass

The Latin Mass Explained and Demonstrated for Priests

St. Edmund Campion Missal & Hymnal for the Traditional Latin Mass

The True Mass at its best (All Saints' at the London Oratory)

From New Liturgical Movement:

Some photographs of this evening's Mass at the London Oratory:

A new papal ferula (and it's horrendous!)

Really?  So now our modernist Holy Father is using a "Touch-Down Jesus?"  What next?  A polyester chasuble with the Rainbow flag?

From Rorate Caeli:

For today's Papal Mass at the Campo Verano cemetery, the Pope made use of a new ferula. This one features the Risen Christ in front of the Cross, an arrangement sometimes called "Resurrexifix".

(UPDATE) This ferula was donated to the Pope last month by Goldlake, a mining corporation that is part of major Italian cement holding Gruppo Financo, with mining concessions in Argentina and Honduras (from which came the metals used for this staff).

Sodomite Army @ the Vatican marches again.

The Secret Gay Life of the Vatican: Inside a Hidden Netherworld of the Catholic Church

By Vanity Fair
10/31/31

www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2013/10/Vatican-secret-gay-life

As rumors of a powerful “gay lobby” within the Vatican make headlines and a new Pope promises reform, Vanity Fair contributing editor Michael Joseph Gross interviews dozens of current and former priests, gay monks, veteran Vatican journalists, Italian aristocrats, and gay men at Roman gyms, bars, nightclubs, sex clubs, and restaurants and finds that “to be gay in the Vatican is no guarantee of success, mark of belonging, or shortcut to erotic intrigue. Most basically it is a sentence of isolation,” a life “in a closet that has no door.”

According to Gross’s piece in the December issue of Vanity Fair (on stands today), a significant number of gay clerics at the Vatican are in positions of great authority, but they inhabit a secretive netherworld because homosexuality is officially condemned. The principal requirement of their power and priesthood is silence about who they really are—at least in public. According to Gross, “Clerics inhabit this silence in a variety of ways. A few keep their sexuality entirely private and adhere to the vow of celibacy. Many others quietly let themselves be known as gay to a limited degree … sometimes they remain celibate and sometimes they do not. A third way, perhaps the least common but certainly the most visible, involves living a double life.

Gross goes on to describe the codes and signals by which gay priests navigate life in the Vatican. “Camp is perhaps the most powerful and pervasive” code, with ironic, effeminate self-mockery allowing priests to “exercise some limited rebellion against their own isolation and invisibility.” One former gay priest describes clerical camp to Gross as “a natural way of expressing [gay identity] while celibate.” Yet in the Church, as in Italian society, Gross writes, “the right appearance—la bella figura­—is all…. Parties celebrating appointment to the Vatican and other high Church offices can be lavish … with many clerics in attendance being ‘gay men wearing everything handmade, perfect, queer as it comes,’” as a prominent figure in the Roman art world tells Gross. Still, Gross finds an every-man-for-himself dynamic in Rome’s gay clerical culture: gay clerics often fail to help one another, says a gay former seminarian who was robbed one night in a park while numerous men stood by, because solidarity entails the risk of being outed.

For clerics who break the vow of celibacy, gay saunas are good places to meet other gay priests and monks (though some gay celibate clerics use the saunas not for sex but to experience a sense of fellowship with others like themselves), according to Gross.

If a gay clergy member makes a connection, it’s possible to use your monastery cell for sexual assignations, as long as you don’t make much noise. “You can sneak people in, no problem,” one gay monk tells Gross, “but try to avoid consistent patterns of movement.” That said, a former monk tells Gross that “no one has sex” with other residents of his own monastery, “because it is like a Big Brother house. Everyone knows everything.”

Upcoming All Saints' and All Souls' Day Liturgies

I have no idea if The Feast of All Saints' is still a Holy Day of Obligation for the Novus Ordo (N.O.) crowd, or simply shot forward to the next Saturday night sing-along.  

As to All Souls' Day:  Haven't a clue if the N.O. even recognizes it.  But if so, how many N.O. priests and bishops would dare wear....drum roll please...BLACK vestments?

Good luck with that!