General story News

New book alleges gay sex in Vatican dorm, shady banking

Italian author Gianluigi Nuzzi holds an Italian copy of his new book, "Merchants in the Temple," in Rome on Nov. 5, 2015. Religion News Service photo by Rosie Scammell

ROME (AP) — The Italian journalist who was put on trial by the Vatican for publishing confidential documents has penned a new book alleging a host of Catholic sins, including gay sex in the dormitory of the Vatican’s youth seminary.

Gianluigi Nuzzi’s “Original Sin” went on sale Thursday.

At a news conference, Nuzzi said his lawyers had hand-delivered a copy to the Vatican’s criminal prosecutor since at least one of the seminarians was a minor at the time of the alleged escapades. The Vatican didn’t immediately comment.

The book reproduces documents from the Vatican’s scandal-marred bank, showing multi-million-dollar accounts in the name of Popes Paul VI and John Paul II and their secretaries. And it alleges that hidden powers in the Vatican were blocking reforms of Pope Francis and his predecessor, Benedict XVI.

About the author

The Associated Press

84 Comments

Click here to post a comment

  • this kind of trash always surprises me. Anyone who understands being a Christian knows that Christians, and heathen also, sin. We all sin. The difference is, Christians are forgiven.
    So some twit coming along expecting Christians to be perfect is really in for a surprise.
    Again, we aren’t perfect, we are forgiven.
    Now, if his intent is to cause a poor reflection on the RCC. I would suggest he should stand in line. They have been around a long, long time and have a lot of things to repent of yet.
    Oh and for Ben – all denominations have clergy who abuse children – not that it is something to be proud of at all – but it is happening all over the place. The RCC doesn’t have them all.

  • perhaps those “kiddy diddling priests” were homosexual?

    Children of same-sex couples are at higher risks of being sexually abused

    Careful studies indicate that cases of paedophilia occur with more frequency amongst same-sex couples than heterosexual couples. Although the homosexual community comprises a tiny minority of the population, this minority is responsible for one-third of all cases of child molestation in the US.[26] According to a Senior Fellow for cultural studies at the Family Research Council, Dr. Timothy J. Dailey, ‘the evidence indicates that both homosexuality and paedophilia are intersecting categories that include many different kinds of sexual behaviour’.[27]

    This is confirmed by a survey carried in the late 1980s by Archives of Sexual Behavior, which revealed that that 86% of the 229 criminals convicted of sexual molestation against children were homosexuals or bisexuals.[28] Further, an empirical research carried by Cameron and Cameron concluded that same-sex parents had committed 10% of all reported cases of child molestation, although they comprised only 0.3% of the random sample.[29] Such a number indicates a disproportional percentage of sexual abuse by homosexual parents, as compared to only 0.6% of children who had been molested by their heterosexual parents. It also indicates, as the researchers who carried this remarkable investigation concluded, ‘a disproportionate association between homosexuality and paedophilia [and] a correspondingly disproportionate risk of homosexual incest… for children reared by homosexuals’.[30] As a former Fellow in Child Psychiatry at Yale University, Dr Jeffrey Satinover, points out:

    [T]he greater number of heterosexual cases reflects the fact that heterosexual males outnumber homosexual males by approximately thirty-six to one… However, heterosexual child molestation cases outnumber homosexual cases by only eleven to one, implying that pedophilia is more than three times more common among homosexuals.[31]

    One of the leading academic journals of the homosexual community is called the Journal of Homosexuality. Published in 1990 there is a special double issue entitled Male Inter-Generational Intimacy. Edited by a notorious paedophile Edward Brongersma, the issue contains articles about sexual relationships between men and small boys. There instances of paedophilia are portrayed as ‘loving relationships’.[32] One of the essays even suggests that parents of sexually abused children should not regard their molesters ‘as a rival or competitor, not as theft of their property, but as a partner in the boy’s upbringing, someone to be welcomed into their home’.[33] Such essays tend to normalise paedophilia and regard the sexual molestation of children as a ‘right’ of the molested child and of the child molester. Similar, in a 1991 article by Helmut Graupner to the Journal of Homosexuality one finds the following statement: ‘Man/boy and woman/girl relations constitute, without a doubt, an aspect of gay and lesbian life’.[34]

    One of the largest homosexual publishers is the Alyson Publications. This publishing house is particularly notorious for its enthusiastic support of paedophilia. One of the most notorious books published by such publisher is entitled ‘Gay Sex: Manual for Men who Love Men’. The book provides child molesters with detailed instructions on how to avoid discovery and arrest when sexually abusing children. Among other things, the book recommends: ‘Avoid situations where a number of men are having sex with the same boy, or group of boys, over a period of time’.[35] In The Age Taboo, a book also published by Alyson Publications, its author contends: ‘Boy-lovers… are not child molesters. The child abusers are… parents who force their staid morality onto the young people in their custody’.[36]
    https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2017/08/childrens-welfare-sex-families/#_ftn27

  • “According to a Senior Fellow for cultural studies at the Family Research Council”

    So you cut and pasted crap from a hate group and are passing it off as something people should consider as factual and take at face value. Um, no. Might as well be posting stuff from David Duke pertaining to his studies of African American communities and such.

  • just because you don’t like who carried the information, does not mean the information is invalid

  • Don’t have to. The source is a hate group known for lying and attacking gays as its primary source of fundraising.

  • No Spud. The “source” is a list of 30 some odd books, reports, studies who care about children.

  • Sandi – But the veracity of information can always be evaluated, and that often begins by evaluating its source. Your source is heavily biased, which means that the information they proffer warrants extra scrutiny. Sometimes an organization’s information has been proven unreliable so often that people eventually dismiss it offhand, and that is where many people are with respect to the FRC.

  • The Washington Post? as re-blogged from another site with links to the full story.

    Yes, by all means tell me how a well respected multiple Pulitzer prize winning newspaper makes up stories for some political agenda. I need a good laugh.

  • Lady… and I use that term only in the sense of your identifiable gender, you are slime. You’ve been corrected on this so many times, but you really don’t care, and more than does the Family Research cOuncil, which does no research, but exists simply to do provide ammunition to people who use their faith as Weapons, hiding behind it.

    But let’s talk about REAL science and REAL research. This is from Newsweek.

    A great deal of evidence has supported the notion that children of gay parents are no worse off than children of straight parents. And now a new, massive review of data from the National Health Interview Surveys from 2013 through 2015 again shows that kids of homosexual parents experience no greater emotional or psychological difficulties when compared with kids of heterosexual parents.

    “As lesbian, gay, and bisexual parented families become more visible, the findings bolster previous studies revealing that children raised in these families have comparable psychological well-being compared with children raised by heterosexual parents,” researcher Jerel Calzo of the San Diego State University Graduate School of Public Health wrote in a statement on the findings.

    The researchers looked at data for around 21,000 children between the ages of 4 and 17. The National Health Interview Survey includes reports on emotional and mental health, and recently its parameters were updated to include parents’ sexual orientation. In the past, people would just guess based on their genders, which would make it unreliable due to bisexuality or really any number of factors. The research was published Wednesday in the journal Child Development..

  • From Wikipedia.

    Douglas Ward Allen (born August 15, 1960)[2] is a Canadian economist and the Burnaby Mountain Professor of Economics at Simon Fraser University. He is known for his research on the effects of LGBT parenting on children’s outcomes, which has reported that children of same-sex parents are less likely to graduate from high school.[3] In 2014, he testified as an expert witness in defense of Michigan’s same-sex marriage ban. During his testimony, he drew scrunity when he acknowledged that he believed that people who engage in homosexual acts will go to hell.[4] The state of Michigan defended Allen’s remarks, arguing that they did not taint the conclusions he expressed in his testimony.[5] The judge in that case, Bernard A. Friedman, subsequently overturned the ban and concluded that Allen’s research on same-sex marriage represented a “fringe viewpoint”.[6]

    So, yet another religious nut case whose testimony was thrown out of court. You should have quoted Regenrus, whose “research” probably did enough to help our cause. All you have demonstrated is that once again, your religion does not make you a moral person, an honest, or a nice person. Allen is yet ANOTHER religious partisan who is willing to bend science to make his religious point.

    Try again.

  • No need to. it does not take away from the truthfulness of his research. His research was taken from the Canadian census……lol. I know……Statistics Canada has gone anti-homosexual

  • Still more reliable than Family Research Council and their merry band of frothing at the mouth mendacious trolls.

  • Sure…..wikipedia does not accept the Bible as being credible on Christian matters. I trust them for sure! lol

  • LoL. You are just an old bigot clinging to fantasy. Your whole belief set is not merely questionable, but actually is simply false.

  • LoL. Sandi, the bible isn’t really credible on ANY matters. It’s an ancient collection of fairy tales with many authors. Nothing more. Put that embarrassing text away already.

  • Sandi, that’s the standard get out of hell free thing about your religious fiction that disgusts me the most.

  • LOL. No, the bible is just a collection of silly fairy tales. Get over it already.

    And get back to that beard growing or you’ll never steal Windy Eddie from Jimmie Shortbeard no matter how hard you wiggle that knee-length beard.

  • Pascal’s Wager from Sandi!

    Now get those BEANs in and grow that beard or you’ll never steal Windy Eddie from Jimmie Shortbeard no matter how hard you wiggle that knee-length beard.

  • LOL. No, the bible is just a collection of silly fairy tales. Just get over it already.

    And get back to that beard growing or you’ll never steal Windy Eddie from Jimmie Shortbeard no matter how hard you wiggle that knee-length beard.

  • As a catholic myself I am not surprised and really cannot get any more disgusted. The clergy have NO clue how much damage they are causing in every way possible. I will state, Francis is not the answer or force to change this either. Yes he speaks pretty words, but he has already done next to nothing.

    What I will state is that I am glad this has come out. I applaud every truth telling anyone can make not just about the RCC, but like Hollywood, and everywhere else where darkness has gained a foot hold and thrives and spreads in secret and through intimidation. It is good for all when the truth comes out and society as a whole can condemn and remove these people from power and influence. It’s quite remarkable that this whole societal sexual scandal has snowballed where people abused can come forward if for the simple fact of no longer hiding in shame and fear. The pillars are falling because they were built on quicksand and the smallest tremor has started to topple them. I hope as a society we can stand for truth and goodness, integrity and ethics to rebuild it something more stable.

  • Of course it does. His testimony in Court is a good indication of his bias. And the fact that given his bias, in his study of census data, of all things, he managed to contradict virtually every piece of research done in the last 40 years, including the one just released that also contradicted him.

    But let’s talk about YOUR bias, because YOU are defending HIM.

    A few years ago, you were happy to defend the Regnerus study, also thrown out of court, laughed out of court because it was such an obvious hit piece. You defended it as accurate. I gave you several quotes where Regnerus himself admitted that HE DIDNT STUDY WHAT HIS STUDY CLAIMED TO HAVE STUDIED. I gave you quotes, sources, and dates. His “study. Was also refuted by actual scientists, pointing out all of the major flaws that REGNERUS HIMSELF ADMITTED TO.

    your response? his study “proved” what you thought it proved.

    Lying for jEsus isn’t nice.

  • data is data, no matter how homosexuals don’t like it
    I also gave you much more than the Regnerus study although I have no problem with the Regnerus study.
    The stats are still there if you want to research them Ben. Homosexual environments hurt kids.
    You’ve given up on credibility to fight “homosexual”.

  • Your source is Augusto Zimmermann, who is a Christian Fundamentalist first and a legal scholar second. He wrote the piece you cite in opposition to the Australian Medical Association’s position that same-sex marriage should be legal there. He is the epitome of a biased source.

  • Anton, it surprises me. If he were a homosexual activist, condemning stats that are not changeable, and are actually on something completely different than what one would expect – not a questionnaire study and nothing to do with homosexuality except counting them, would you still feel the same way?

  • “alleges that hidden powers in the Vatican were blocking reforms of Pope Francis”?
    Every single official that has anything to do with Vatican finance has been appointed by this pope. Vatican finance has become more secretive and less transparent under this pope.

  • “Anyone who understands being a Christian knows that Christians, and heathen also, sin. We all sin. The difference is, Christians are forgiven. ”

    Yet again you know better than the purported statements of the man on whom your religion is founded. Try reading Matt:7 – you know – in the book you say is error free – and it says your statement above is wrong – very, very wrong.

    So who do you think is wrong Sandi or Jesus?

  • Mere facts will not change the mind of any ideologue/hater like this “:woman”.

    I think it would be very useful to have some insight into the psychology of folks like this–why do they insist on believing and propagating nonsense, when they’ve been corrected numerous times? What and how do they gain by continuing to propagate lies?

    We need clear, accurate thinking on this and indeed all important, controversial issues. Having the info on motivations and thinking would help us deal with evil people like this person.

  • This reads like the same bull shit religion laced ideology behind anti-miscegenation laws and literature. Didn’t the Family Research Council protect a known molester? Isn’t the Family Research Council calling for the return to the Comstock Era with the insistence that all non-Christians must conform to the dictates of their brand of Christianity? The brand of Christianity that dictates the subjugation of all females to the avarice of males…with no recourse for those who are regularly abused by those same males?

  • The overall thrust of this book should not be ignored.

    The RCC has known about priests-and-sex for literally 1,000+ years.

    More recently, a study commissioned by the Catholic church, and performed by a former monk (Richard Sipe), in 1992 found that 50% of priests were non-celibate. And of those 50%, 50% were non-celibate with men, and 50% with women.

    Naturally, predictably, the Church ignored this finding, in order to protect itself.

    I believe the church teaches “the church *is* the people.”

    What nonsense.

  • Not all bigotry is hate, though for some bigots, hate is sufficient. For a lot of people, bigotry is the always present and assumed, completely unwarranted faith in their own highly imaginary superiority. For hyper religious people, that goes triple.

    Having observed her for quite a while, My armchair psychology For someone like Sandimonious, is that she wants to project an image of sweetness and light, but she is basically a sociopathic personality that barely holds her sociopathy in check. It comes through as passive aggressiveness. (I recognize the type because my mother was such a one).

    Her comment about Regnerus is highly revealing. He him self admitted he didn’t study what he claimed to have studied. She insists that “data is data.”

    There isn’t much you can do with those people.

  • Zimmermann’s neglecting to consider research that doesn’t fit his agenda is just one more indication of his extreme bias.

  • I don’t think you’ve ever worked in the field of child protection as I have or qualifications in psychiatry and paediatrics, so you may not have examined the entire range of the literature. I couldn’t be selective in my studies, whereas a layperson can pick and choose according to their own perspective and prejudices.
    Most child sexual abuse, both in my long experience and extensive study of peer-reviewed journals, takes place in families, I agree, but the perpetrator is usually a step-father, “acting”father, who is straight. This is also true when offspring of both sexes are abused. These men would never consider themselves gay or even bisexual, it’s just they’re bad bastards who like power and don’t care who or what they screw. The family dog may not be excluded. (Sad but true!)
    My job was to protect the child and as a paediatrician my duty of care was for the child, towards parents or any other adults I had no ethical responsibility beyond that of one human to another. If I suspected ill doing, I’d have been the first to point it out, no matter who the adult in question happened to be. I have no sympathy with child abusers, but fortunately I don’t have to judge them, it’s already done. Our Lord was clear, Matt 18:6, Mark 9:42, Luke 17:2.

  • Agreed. But these people also care about children.
    The best scripture for this seems to be:

    Ephesians 5:11 – New International Version

    Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them.

  • That gets closer to why she (et al) do this nonsense, but still does not address some key questions, such as, what about damage to her reputation, pushing false info?

    If we know why these folks propagate these lies, it seems to me we will be better able to counter them.

    From what I’ve seen, it looks to me like one reason for pushing false information is to gain allies/members/supporters for an organization. Some folks who do this nonsense, such as David Barton in Texas, who lies about US history, I suspect do it knowing that those who will swallow their lies are disinclined to do any research themselves, and even if they do, are disinclined to believe the truth.

    Another reason, again engaged in by high-profile “leaders”, is, I suspect, to gain emotional support from those who they are targetting or addressing.

    However, these motives don’t seem applicable to Sandimonious (et al). I think we need more targetted, scientific explanations for their behavior.

  • She doesn’t care about her reputation. She’s a bible believing Christian. And this is online. sandi Luckins may not even be he real name.

  • I would put the word “Christian” in quotes, or otherwise indicate that although she calls herself a Christian, like most fundies or evangelicals, she’s pretty far from what most people think of as a Christian.

  • When I think of Christians, I think of one of two types.

    My christian friends, who view fundamentalism and dominionism as completely opposite to being good human beings and to Christ’s teachings.

    And the fundamentalists and dominionists and money grubbers, hypocrites to a man or woman, and who are no better than they ought to be, or likely are.

  • What a bunch of propaganda! And worse yet, you have used it to deflect from the article. The fact is that homosexuals that are taught to feel guilt because they have no sexual desire for women, they gravitate toward the all boys club of the Catholic Church. And worse yet, small fortunes of charitable donations to the Church have been used to defend pedophile priests in the Courts and pay settlements to victims of these sexual assaults. How many of these priests have ever had to spend a night in prison for these acts on children?

    There are people that sexually abuse their children, but that is usually limited to their children, as opposed to priests that have many opportunities and are so trusted that their victims are afraid to say anything or press charges.

  • You stated: “a survey carried in the late 1980s by Archives of Sexual Behavior, which revealed that that 86% of the 229 criminals [convicted] of sexual molestation against children were homosexuals or bisexuals.” Key word “convicted”! Respected members of the community are rarely convicted, especially back then. That is why you find so few teachers, clergy, doctors, and police convicted of these acts back in the day. If you were a minority, poor, or homosexual, you did not have much of a chance of getting away with anything, to include looking guilty.

    And then 86% of the 229 criminals surveyed, just by chance, 200 of them just happened to be homosexual. What is the statistical possibility? I have asked you to think before you post, that way you will not look so ignorant by injecting such poorly collected stats from 35 years ago.

  • I’ve told her the same thing myself, on several occasions. Sandi doesn’t care about the truth, only about “get the gays”.

  • One needs more than a citation and a claim. That figure is highly, highly suspicious, seeing as it contradicts just about every authority on the subject in the civilized world.

  • Apart from any other consideration, I would not likely cite Newsweek as an authoritative or particularly neutral source of legitimately derived evidence.

  • None of this reporting is surprising or new. One would hope that the disinfectant of exposure would lead to a proverbial deep cleaning; but such has not yet proved to be the case.

  • The Bible is an old book that has no bearing on this, or any other real conversation. Go peddle your death cult elsewhere.

  • no need to. Jesus is the same yesterday, today and forever Ramone. It’s still current and will be until Jesus returns

  • When JP2 died, St Peter opened the pearly gates for him, and inside seated upon a magnificent golden throne was the Great God – Buddha, who said to JP – what the f**k do you want ?

  • It was a research study that was reported in Newsweeek.

    Personally, I’ll take Newsweek over anything produced by fox.

  • I used to follow Newsweek avidly in the 80’s, not so much today. I confess that I do follow Fox closely but not exclusively. Quite honestly, I don’t really trust any news source these days. There’s entirely too much conflict of interest.

  • Edward, you’re smart enough to recognize when someone is telling you the truth, versus someone telling you just enough truth.
    A few weeks ago, they found the bodies of a couple missing for months in the desert of Joshua Tree. It looked like they had run our of water and food, and had taken the only way out of a horrible, slow death. HE shot her, then himself. So the police determined at first glance.
    All well and good, very romantic, and very, very sad. But who goes into the desert in July– 110* plus– with a no water, but with a gun? Especially when the largest, most dangerous thing you are likely to encounter is a jackrabbit?
    Why would Hillary Clinton run a pedophile ring out of a pizza parlor? Why would Mr. Obama be a secret Muslim, when his church affiliation went back decades?

  • The Joshua Tree case was quite tragic, but given the fecklessness of human beings, the conclusion of the police was not implausible. As to the gun, there are rattlesnakes in the desert after all. I have read enough tales of humans in similar circumstances that the particular conclusion and outcome in this case is no surprise at all. People, when exploring “nature” are very often unprepared and uneducated, which is precisely why we have the end result as described here. I won’t contest your other examples.

  • Edward, I’ve been down to the desert many, many, many times. I’ve seen a few jack rabbits, a couple of alligator lizards, and an occasional bird. The story stank from the get go. That’s my whole point.

  • You may be quite correct, but whatever the cause, we know the effect. Implausibilities (sic) are something we will always have to suffer with. And humans being humans, we will disagree over what’s plausible or not.

  • Damn it, damn it, damn it! I KNEW I should have been a Catholic priest. They are partying harder than I do now and I want to go gather with fellow gay men and see how much we can come up with that’ll need the forgiveness of the father!

ADVERTISEMENTs