The news coming out of the Catholic Church these days concerning the massive sexual abuse scandal festering at its heart goes from bad to worse with every passing day:

One of the most influential figures in getting Francis elected pope was Washington, DC’s former archbishop, Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, who is at the center of the current sex abuse scandal due to his decades-long sexual abuse of priests, seminarians, and laypeople—including minors. Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, a former papal ambassador to the United States under Pope Benedict XVI, recently released an affidavit letter stating that Pope Francis knew about the sanctions imposed on McCarrick by Pope Benedict, but chose to lift them anyway and make McCarrick a member of his inner circle of advisers, a position which allowed McCarrick to advance the names of his allies for election as bishops and cardinals.

Lawler said, “Once he was in office as Pope, Pope Francis leaned on people who were his favorites, and one of his favorites was Cardinal McCarrick. So, there’s no question that Cardinal McCarrick had tremendous influence in this papacy. The only question, in my mind, is whether what Archbishop Viganò said is true — and I tend to think it is — that Pope Francis was aware of [McCarrick’s] background, was aware that Pope Benedict had imposed sanctions on [McCarrick for sexual abuse] — although he didn’t do that openly, it wasn’t public — and nevertheless relied on him despite the evidence of [McCarrick’s] moral turpitude. [McCarrick] was a major influence early in this pontificate.”

Mansour highlighted a 2017 Associated Press report detailing Francis’s lessening of penalties and sanctions, relative to his predecessors, on sexually abusive priests. Quoting the article, Mansour read, “Pope Francis has quietly reduced sanctions against a handful of pedophile priests, applying his vision of a merciful church even to its worst offenders.”

Lawler said, “There’s a pattern here. Pope Francis has promoted cardinals who have been charged with either sexual misconduct … as in the case of McCarrick, or with covering up misconduct, as in the case of Cardinal Danneels who he appointed to the Senate; Cardinal Maradiaga who’s the chairman of his council of cardinal advisers, the equivalent of his cabinet; Cardinal Errázuriz in Chile who’s right at the middle of the [sex abuse] explosion that caused all the other bishops of Chile to resign.”

[…]

Mansour noted that even a liberal Catholic like the late Richard Sipe, who spent his life studying the problem of clerical sex abuse, “believed that there was a correlation between the secret gay lifestyle of priests and bishops and also the covering up for the sexual abuse scandal.”

She also cited a New York Times editorial on the abuse scandal which notes the prevalence of high ranking church officials around Pope Francis who are shielded by the pope despite the fact that they are flagrantly disobeying their vows of celibacy by living an actively homosexual lifestyle. The Times editorial noted the case of “Msgr. Battista Ricca, a Vatican diplomat who, while stationed in Uruguay, reportedly lived with a man, was beaten at a cruising spot and once got stuck in an elevator with a rent boy. (In Uruguay, the age of consent is 15.)” Instead of censuring Ricca, Pope Francis stood by him, saying, “Who am I to judge?” Mansour noted that the Pope was more concerned about criminality than morality, dismissing Ricca’s behavior with the 15-year-old boy prostitute because the age of consent in Uruguay is technically only 15.

“Pope Francis’s response to hearing this story was, ‘Well, he didn’t do anything wrong because it’s not illegal. It wasn’t a crime. Who am I to judge?’ Well, 15 years old happens to be the age of a number of the abuse victims detailed in the Pennsylvania attorney general’s report. So this does have something to do with [the sex abuse of minors],” Mansour said.

At this point, I am rather hoping that my Christian readers – most of whom are far better men than me – will forgive my use of explicit profanity, but…

Holy shit.

I have written about Pope Francis a few times over the last 5 years. Way back in 2013, when his economic illiteracy came to light, I wrote that the Catholic Church will survive a bad Pope – because it always has before. There have been plenty of terrible Popes over the two thousand or so years of its existence, and there will be plenty more to come.

That, after all, is what happens when a Pope is picked not by God but by men. And, let’s be honest, my Catholic friends – that is how the Pope is actually selected. A big group of Ye Olde Phartes wearing funny archaic clothes gather in a room and proceed to play serious politics for several hours, then vote in a “secret” ballot (which has been corrupted at least once through simony) until they finally agree on a reasonable compromise choice that satisfies all of the various factions and give the signal to start blowing white smoke through a chimney.

Hey, I didn’t say it made any kind of sense. I’m just telling it like it is (more or less).

Looking at what has happened under Pope Francis’s watch, though… it is now difficult to remain quite so sanguine.

Don’t get me wrong, the Catholic Church has been through much, much worse than this. The bans and anathemas of 1054, which saw the Roman and Greek churches break away from each other; the Crusades and the subsequent loss of the Kingdom of Outremer; the two very close-run things that were the sieges of Vienna; and far worse besides.

I haven’t even touched upon how bad the Anglican break and the Reformation were for the Church, and yet the institution has survived even until today in the face of the greatest heresy it has ever faced, Modernism.

But this scandal, in particular, is horrifying because it shows that evil festers deep in the very heart of an institution that is supposed to be dedicated to destroying it and helping Mankind know the Word of God.

The deeper you look at this scandal, the worse it gets.

For decades, priests and bishops of the Church abused their positions of power and influence to abuse, sodomise, and corrupt young men and boys. This is not in dispute. As Irish journalist and staunch Catholic John Waters points out:

We have known since the John Jay Report published by the US bishops in 2004 that the overwhelming majority of abuse in the Church was carried out against teenage boys. The levels of pedophilia in the Church are shown by this report to be below those of the general population—whereas the levels of homosexual abuse were many multiples of the general situation.

[…]

[T]he problem arises in large part from the invasion of the priesthood in the 1970s and 1980s by unprecedented numbers of gay men, devoid of vocations, who now seek to undermine Church teaching on all sexual questions and who—rightly or wrongly—have come to see Pope Francis as an ally. This fifth column, the peel masquerading as the fruit, is the chief agent of the coverups of the abuses its own members have perpetrated.

Let’s be very clear here about a few things.

First – the Bible’s teachings about sexual morality are absolutely clear. (Here I must ask my Christian readers to forgive any errors of interpretation that I make here – if I make any, they are made in ignorance and are mine alone.)

Both the Old and New Testaments make it very clear that sexual immorality is the worst kind of immorality possible. Just to prove the point:

Leviticus 18:22:

You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.

1 Corinthians 6:18-20:

Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside
the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body. Or
do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within
you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, for you were bought
with a price. So glorify God in your body.

Romans 1:24-27:

Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to
the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged
the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature
rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen. For this reason
God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged
natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men
likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with
passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and
receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.

These acts of homosexual abuse and pederasty are horrifying to all decent men and women precisely because they are a mortal affront to the Almighty Himself, who hates sin and cannot stand to be in the presence of men who sin.

And that brings us to an important point because:

Second – the Catechism of the Catholic Church has a very clear demand that any priest or clergyman who takes up orders must also swear an oath of celibacy:

All the ordained ministers of the Latin Church, with the exception of permanent deacons, are normally chosen from among men of faith who live a celibate life and who intend to remain celibate “for the sake of the kingdom of heaven.” Called to consecrate themselves with undivided heart to the Lord and to “the affairs of the Lord,” they give themselves entirely to God and to men. Celibacy is a sign of this new life to the service of which the Church’s minister is consecrated; accepted with a joyous heart celibacy radiantly proclaims the Reign of God.” (CCC paragraph 1579)

In light of what we are now seeing, with respect to the unmistakable corruption of the Church from within, it may well be time to rethink and even do away with this ordinance.

I realise that such a suggestion could be violently offensive to Catholics everywhere. I would recommend to those offended by the idea that they read up a little on Church history. The fact is that for the first thousand or so years of its existence, the Church itself was not terribly clear on the requirements for celibacy.

Yes, it is true that Jesus Himself was celibate – the wild fantasies of a certain popular fiction author notwithstanding. Yes, it is true that the Apostle Paul recommended and stressed celibacy for the priesthood, and urged Christian ministers and clergymen to follow the example of Jesus and make the Church their bride. But these were not hard and fast rules until much, much later.

Note: marriage is not a perfect solution to the problem of homosexual and paedophile clergymen. It is all too easy for predatory men to use wives and families as “beards” to cover up their Satanic degeneracy.

But it is a safeguard, and a powerful one, for the fairly obvious reason that a married clergyman who is faithful to his wife and loves his children is very unlikely to be a homosexual and/or a child abuser.

Reintroducing the possibility of married clergy to the Church is not heretical. It is in fact common in other Christian denominations to permit married clergymen. And while this is not the time or place for flame wars between different denominations of Christianity – nor do I intend to permit such in the comments section to this post, so fair warning there – it is worth pointing out that the recommendations for abstinence, chastity, and celibacy sit side-by-side with injunctions to be faithful to one’s spouse and to “go forth and multiply”.

The fact is that Christianity is the West, as I have stated plainly before. In order to defend Western civilisation, we need Christians – and not of the weak-kneed, watery-bellied Churchian type either. We need men of faith who believe that the Word of Our Lord must be defended – with reason and love wherever possible, and with steel if absolutely necessary.

And for all of its many faults, the fact is that no institution in history has ever done more to advance human freedom, happiness, knowledge, and prosperity than the Catholic Church and its many monastic and fraternal orders.

With that in mind, let’s look at one other key point:

Third – from what I can see, and I do not pretend that it is very much, the rot in the Catholic Church is so bad at this point that the only solution is to institute a new Inquisition of some kind.

That suggestion is certain to set off spontaneous rage-vomiting and hysterical reactions everywhere. So let me reiterate this, just to be sure that I really do cheese off the right people:

The infestation is so bad that the only way to purge it is to cleanse the Church through a new Inquisition.

It is now very clear that the Pope himself – supposedly God’s appointed shepherd on Earth – has no intention of cleaning house.

It is very clear that the Lavender Mafia is such that it is likely that Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, a staunch conservative and strong opponent of the homosexual lobby, had to retire or face the destruction of his papacy.

It is very clear that Catholics have been severely let down by their own most revered institution, which has quietly shuttled priests suspected of child abuse and homosexual sin to other parishes instead of doing what should have been done and defrocking those priests and throwing them straight into secular prisons. The Vatican has stated openly that while priests must be aware of local laws concerning pederasty and homosexual abuse, they must first refer such matters to the internal structure of the Church itself.

Except… what institution within that structure actually has the balls and the teeth to ensure that abusers are brought to justice? None that I can see. Maybe I’m not looking in the right places, but from the revelations of this continuing scandal it appears that not very much is being done to punish those guilty of the worst sins imaginable.

So here are some humble suggestions from an admitted pagan as to how the Catholic Church can go about purging this filth from its ranks.

An Inquisition, similar to the infamous Spanish version that struck such terror in the hearts of heretics everywhere, should be re-instituted with the specific and limited mandate of finding and rooting out homosexuals and child abusers from within the Catholic Church.

An ecclesiastical court composed of men of unimpeachable integrity and unshakable faith in Our Lord must be convened to weigh the evidence and judge those accused of homosexual abuse or child molestation – and those so accused should be given the right to face their accusers. Yes, that is traumatic to the victims, but the presumption of innocence and the right to face one’s accusers are cornerstones of a functional justice system and cannot be discarded in this case.

(Exactly how such men are to be found is a question for wiser and better men than my own ‘umble self ‘ere.)

Those found guilty of homosexual sin should be defrocked, stripped of all possessions, and thrown out of the Church and onto the street – in full view of their congregations. They broke their vows, sinned against the Law of God, and deserve neither mercy nor pity.

As for pederasts – these are the worst kinds of men and should be treated as such.

Those found guilty of first offences should be castrated – without anaesthesia. And then the wound inflicted should be cauterised with a red-hot brand of shame, to serve as a stark and terrible warning to others of the grave penalty for sin.

Those found guilty of repeated offences should simply be executed.

I’m a little ambivalent as to the precise method for such execution, to be honest. I rather think that impalement is useful and damned effective, if extremely messy and unpleasant and quite barbaric. But I also rather like the idea of just crucifying such abusers.

Each method has its pros and cons. The major problem with the second method is that it kind of sort of conflates paedophile priests with the Christ – He did die on the Cross, after all.

But I suspect that a certain practicing Roman Catholic, ex-Lieutenant Colonel in the US Army, and Excruciator Majoris of the Evil Legion of Evil would thoroughly approve of this kind of punishment.

So it may well be that a simple hanging would suffice. Or not. What say you, readers?

I’m not overly picky as to how such offences are punished. I am picky as to the offences themselves. Pederasty is a truly horrifying sin and any man who abuses a child is not fit to be called a “man” any longer.

Let me close out with one final point.

I did not enjoy writing this article, at all. Discussing things like homosexuality and especially pederasty make me feel sick to my stomach, which I think is a common reaction among all decent men who love their families and Our Lord. But the ongoing fallout of this abuse scandal has simply reinforced something that I’ve come to learn the hard way over the last few years:

Daemons are real, they exist, and they really do infect men’s souls.

There was a time when I would have laughed in your face if you had suggested to me that daemons and fallen angels are real. If a sinner claims to be possessed by a daemon, that is in many ways a cop-out; it absolves him or her of any responsibility for individual actions.

Nowadays, though… after everything that I have seen, and after reading through at least some of the Scriptures, it is clear to me that daemons are absolutely real.

When the “BTK Killer”, who was once a church leader and a married man with children, says that he has a daemon inside him that drove him to do what he did, I have to say that I’m rather inclined to believe him.

The sexual abuse scandal within the Church is no different in this respect. It is written quite clearly in the Gospels and associated texts that Satan seeks to corrupt the hearts of men and their most holy institutions in order to pervert and destroy the Word.

What, precisely, is this scandal if not an absolute and unmistakable manifestation of that attempt at corruption?

The stink of sulphur is strong within the Church, and grows stronger by the day. It must be purged forthwith, violently if necessary, so that the Church can be clean again.