Paging Randy Engel! Paging Bella Dodd! Decoding the 'gay lobby'...

Whatever do you mean?

From John Allen:

[W]hen Italians say there’s a “gay lobby” in the Vatican, they don’t mean an organized faction with the aim of changing Church teaching on homosexuality or same-sex marriage. 

Instead, what they have in mind is an informal, loosely organized network of clergy who support one another, keep one another’s secrets, and help one another move up the ladder. The group is perceived to have a vested interest in thwarting attempts at reform, since they benefit from secrecy and old-guard ways. 

It’s called “gay” because, the theory goes, a Vatican official’s homosexuality can be a very powerful secret, especially if he’s sexually active, and threatening to expose him can be an effective way of keeping him in line. It’s hardly the only such possibility, however, and, in any event, the emphasis is not on sex but secrecy, as well as the related impression of people getting promoted or decisions being made on the basis of personal quid pro quos. 

That’s not to say that the perception of a widespread presence of gays in the clergy isn’t a strong part of the picture, especially in light of the furor last fall over Polish Monsignor Krzysztof Charamsa, the former Vatican official who outed himself on the brink of a controversial Synod of Bishops on the family. 

Yet the speculation over a “lobby” isn’t really about sexual orientation, but the impression of a system in which people living personally conflicted lives look out for one another. In that sense, the term “gay lobby” is often synonymous for Italian-speakers with corruption, secrecy, and a sleazy sort of personal patronage. - John Allen

Get it?

To paraphrase:

The emphasis is not on homo-sex and orgies and bathhouse shenanigans, much less lace and leather - but secrecy, as well as the related impression of people getting promoted or decisions being made on the basis of personal quid pro quos. Such as I kept your secret so you keep mine and give me a nice parish.

Why does John Allen understand this when clerics who have lived and worked in the Vatican don't?  Or at least say they don't.



BTW:  Did they ever find the eleven hundred Communists Bella Dodd claimed weaseled their way into seminaries and rose to the top of the hierarchy just in time to call a Council and destroy the Church?  You would have thought she'd have a list with names, locations, and titles.