Francis to Italian bishops: excessive “f******y” in certain Italian seminaries

I was sent a piece from the Italian news agency ANSA about an address Francis gave to the Italian bishops, whose plenary is at this time of year.   My contacts in Italy say the press is going bananas over this.

In a nutshell, in no uncertain terms, Francis said that… well… here’s the top of the story from ANSA.

Durissimo attacco di Papa Francesco contro la presenza di omosessuali nei seminari.

Nell’incontro a porte chiuse con gli oltre 200 vescovi italiani, che lunedì scorso ha aperto nell’Aula del Sinodo l’assemblea generale della Cei, il Pontefice su questo argomento si è lanciato in serratissimi richiami verso una maggiore selezione negli accessi ai seminari, non senza usare termini anche coloriti e puntando persino il dito – come ha riferito il sito Dagospia, seguito poi da altri media – contro l’eccesso di “frociaggine”.

Very harsh attack by Pope Francis against the presence of homosexuals in seminaries.

In the closed-door meeting with over 200 Italian bishops, which opened the general assembly of the CEI in the Synod Hall last Monday, the Pontiff made very strong calls on this topic for greater selection in access to seminaries, not without using colorful terms and even pointing the finger – as reported by the Dagospia website, followed by other media – against the excess of “faggotry”.

Il severo intervento del Pontefice, che non ha mancato di sorprendere i presenti, è confermato da diverse fonti. Per Bergoglio, quindi, non vanno ammessi omosessuali nei seminari. Dal “chi sono io per giudicare” a una posizione ora molto più tranchant, se non altro per quanto riguarda la selezione e formazione dei sacerdoti. Il tema è oggetto di dibattito da molti anni, e già un’istruzione del dicastero vaticano per il Clero del 2005 – sotto Benedetto XVI – confermata nel 2016 con papa Francesco, stabiliva che “la Chiesa, pur rispettando profondamente le persone in questione, non può ammettere al Seminario e agli Ordini sacri coloro che praticano l’omosessualità, presentano tendenze omosessuali profondamente radicate o sostengono la cosiddetta cultura gay”. The severe intervention of the Pontiff, which did not fail to surprise those present, is confirmed by various sources. For Bergoglio, therefore, homosexuals should not be allowed in seminaries. From “who am I to judge” to a now much more trenchant position, if only with regards to the selection and training of priests. The topic has been the subject of debate for many years, and an instruction from the Vatican Dicastery for the Clergy in 2005 – under Benedict XVI – confirmed in 2016 with Pope Francis, established that “the Church, while profoundly respecting the people in question, does not can admit to the Seminary and Holy Orders those who practice homosexuality, have deeply rooted homosexual tendencies or support the so-called gay culture”.
I vescovi italiani, da parte loro, nell’ultima assemblea svoltasi ad Assisi avevano dibattuto sulla possibilità di restrizioni più sfumate, sentendosi incoraggiati proprio dalle passate aperture di Bergoglio sul tema dell’omosessualità. Pur tra molte contestazioni, era stato quindi approvato un emendamento che si limitava a distinguere tra “atti” e “tendenze”, ribadendo l’obbligo del celibato per tutti i seminaristi, omosessuali ed eterosessuali, e aprendo così la porta dei seminari ai candidati gay al sacerdozio impegnati però nell’opzione del celibato. Ma nel confronto di un’ora e mezza con i presuli, di fatto il Papa ha sbarrato la strada: quindi rispetto, sì, per la persona gay che bussa alle porte del seminario, ma ponendo dei fermi paletti all’accesso per evitare che l’omosessuale che sceglie il sacerdozio finisca per fare una doppia vita, con tutte le conseguenze negative del caso. E per rafforzare il suo parere ed essere chiaro anche con una battuta, Francesco avrebbe recriminato esplicitamente sull’eccesso di “frociaggine” in certi seminari italiani. The Italian bishops, for their part, in the last assembly held in Assisi had debated the possibility of more nuanced restrictions, feeling encouraged by Bergoglio’s past openness on the topic of homosexuality. Despite many protests, an amendment was therefore approved which limited itself to distinguishing between “acts” and “tendencies”, reiterating the obligation of celibacy for all seminarians, homosexual and heterosexual, and thus opening the door of the seminaries to gay candidates to the priesthood committed however to the option of celibacy. But in an hour and a half confrontation with the prelates, the Pope effectively blocked the way: therefore respect, yes, for the gay person who knocks on the doors of the seminary, but by placing firm barriers at access to prevent the The homosexual who chooses the priesthood ends up leading a double life, with all the negative consequences that entails. And to strengthen his opinion and be clear even with a joke, Francis would have explicitly complained about the excess of “faggotry” in certain Italian seminaries.
[…] […]

The Jesuits and Fishwrap were unavailable for comment.

The Italian word “frocio”, even worse in its Roman version “froscio”, has uncertain roots.  One believable explanation is that it derives ultimately from Latin ferox.  There are other less polite origins.

The moderation queue is on.

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Seminarians and Seminaries, SESSIUNCULA, Sin That Cries To Heaven. Bookmark the permalink.

18 Comments

  1. OzReader says:

    Colour me stunned. I wonder, therefore, what the Holy Father thinks of a “certain Jesuit” in the USA, assuming this isn’t just another selectively-reported piece that aims to paint the Pope as conservative, when in reality his actions prove otherwise.

  2. BeatifyStickler says:

    What a time to be alive!!

  3. bartlep says:

    Are all the prayers for PF’s “conversion” starting to work??

  4. AA Cunningham says:

    Perhaps the Pontiff has gotten around to reading the 2 February 1961 release from the Sacred Congregation for Religious titled:

    Religiosorum Institutio Instruction on the Careful Selection And Training Of Candidates For The States Of Perfection And Sacred Orders

    which reads in part:

    30. Those To Be Excluded; Practical Directives:

    Advantage to religious vows and ordination should be barred to those who are afflicted with evil tendencies to homosexuality or pederasty, since for them the common life and the priestly ministry would constitute serious dangers.

  5. TWF says:

    He never ceases to surprise me. He surrounds himself with prelates who say all sorts of wonky things. But he himself will sometimes flat out contradict them. In his recent interview with 60 minutes he gave a definitive “no” to deaconesses…. Yet his Synod head guy just said they’re still a big discussion point just the other day.

  6. summorumpontificum777 says:

    Over the past decade, there have been many, many reports that the Holy Father deploys a very salty and colorful vocabulary behind closed doors, so this report isn’t shocking per se. I wonder, though, is there more here than meets the eye? With this most Machiavellian of modern pontificates, one must constantly question whether what the media presents as the Holy Father’s shoot-from-the-hip words and deeds are truly spontaneous or whether they are in fact a coldly calculated stratagem. I ask, could a well-timed leak that the Holy Father uses coarse, demeaning language when speaking of homosexuality be a cynical attempt to defuse international concerns that he went too far in the direction of embracing homosexuality with Fiducia Supplicans?

  7. Not says:

    That door has been wide open for decades!

  8. aam says:

    Prayers answered?

  9. aam says:

    Sodomites have infested every secular and religious institution. May Jesus grant Pope Francis the wisdom and strength to resist them.

  10. Tina in Ashburn Whoville says:

    Well good for Pope Francis for this blunt and truthful statement.

    “Avoid all effeminacy in prayer” …from some spiritual manual I read.
    And that applies to everybody. We all have a role to play, even as laity, to squash the corruption. And for that worst kind of behavior of the clergy, St Peter Damian, Dr of the Church, had strong, severe recommendations on how to end it [see the Book of Gomorrah]. His stern advice is not “politically correct” at all but necessary actions that preserve the safety of the Faith. St Peter excoriates permissive superiors that enable the behavior instead of corral and punish.
    This is not a new problem, dating far back, for which the solutions have always been known.
    When the criminal is not adequately stopped and punished, all of society suffers for the lack of reparation to God’s Justice. And so here we are…

  11. tgarcia2 says:

    Ok Aam, “Sodomites have infested every secular and religious institution.”
    I’ll remember that when I see my boss ?

    Not surprising given how salty Argentines are and it’s all to “make a mess”

  12. Ariseyedead says:

    I hope this does NOT mean that PF is fine with a “moderate” amount of faggotry in priests and seminarians.

  13. JustaSinner says:

    This brings to mind that old adage about broken clocks…

  14. Kathleen10 says:

    This dog won’t hunt. It is well documented his entire clerical life has been full of say this then say that. This is either a part of his personality or an intentional maneuver to keep others off their feet and keep him as the center of everything. It means nothing, he’ll be back to lauds and love letters for flaming individuals tomorrow. Francis has only one actual gift left for the church.

  15. Venerator Sti Lot says:

    Probably not the only comment properly queuing to note that Andreas Wailzer has a post (of “Tue May 28, 2024 – 3:27 pm EDT”) at Lifesite News entitled ‘Vatican issues statement apologizing for Pope Francis using ‘homophobic’ term’ with (among other interesting matter) a link to the statement by “il Direttore della Sala Stampa della Santa Sede, Matteo Bruni” which concludes “Il Papa non ha mai inteso offendere o esprimersi in termini omofobi, e rivolge le sue scuse a coloro che si sono sentiti offesi per l’uso di un termine, riferito da altri” rendered in Mr. Walizer’s post as ““The Pope never intended to offend or express himself in homophobic terms, and he extends his apologies to those who felt offended by the use of a term, reported by others.”

  16. PostCatholic says:

    What a wonderful non-apology, Venerator Sti Lot. Perhaps he’ll rewrite your Act of Contrition? “Oh my God, I am heartily that Thee felt offended…”

  17. Imrahil says:

    Dear Venerator Sti Lot,

    thanks. Well, that is better than could have been expected: if one actually looks at it, they don’t complain about the content of what the Pope said at all. Just about the word used – and why not, that is diplomacy or possibly even the “tact” the Catechism speaks of. They did not – at least not in the words you cite – apologize for expressing the factual content of this word. This is much better than we might have expected.

  18. Venerator Sti Lot says:

    An intriguing detail of Mr. Wailzer’s article is that he notes (in translation, but with link) that “Dagospia claimed that he also said that bishops must, therefore, ‘get all the queers [checche] out of the seminaries, even those only semi-oriented.’” So, for which “term reported by others” (of two – at least) is il Direttore apologizing on behalf of il Papa?

Comments are closed.