Where Pope Leo Holds Back, Others Rejoice: the Chaos of the LGBT Jubilee Day

On Saturday, September 6th, a jubilee day dedicated to LGBT groups was held in the Vatican, with the participation of La Tenda di Gionata, an Italian organization that actively engages Catholics on the topic of homosexuality. The initiative, inherited from the Jubilee planning under Pope Francis, caused embarrassment for the current administration. 

Although downgraded to a “non-official day,” the event apparently took place in a manner not fully compliant with the rules set by the Vatican organizers themselves.

A brief recap to understand how things reached this point. The Jubilee, themed around hope, was proclaimed by Pope Francis on May 9, 2024. When the calendar of jubilee events was released, the inclusion of a pro-LGBT event was received with surprise, having been approved by the pope himself and enthusiastically supported by the Jesuit order and the Italian Episcopal Conference—especially its president, Cardinal Matteo Zuppi. The initiative, inspired by a Jesuit from Bologna, Fr. Pino Piva, was initially removed from the official calendar due to the backlash that ensued, but was later reinstated without any formal announcement.

The groundwork for the event had been laid in the preceding weeks through a series of receptions, appointments, and audiences. On August 28th, Pope Leo XIV received María Lucía Caram. The nun is known for her pro-gay and pro-choice activism, as well as for rejecting dogmas of the Catholic faith. The meeting, confirmed by photographs from Vatican Media, was not reported in the official Bulletin of the Holy See. Whether this concealment signals a desire to avoid giving the meeting undue prominence, or to obscure an underlying process, is not easy to discern.

Then, on September 1st, came the audience with Father James Martin, the well-known American Jesuit deeply committed to reshaping Catholic doctrine on homosexual conduct. Father Martin described the pope as “serene, joyful, and encouraging,” and called the meeting “deeply consoling,” saying that Pope Prevost continues “the same message I heard from Pope Francis about LGBT Catholics—a message of openness and welcome.”

However, when the long-awaited jubilee day arrived, everything was scaled down to a “non-official event,” and the Mass for LGBT pilgrims was celebrated at the Church of the Gesù—the symbolic Jesuit church from which the initiative originated. Bishop Francesco Savino, vice president of the Italian Episcopal Conference, enthusiastically presided over the celebration. At the end of his homily, he said: “It is time to restore dignity to everyone, especially to those from whom it has been denied.”

Despite the media enthusiasm of its most fervent supporters, the LGBT Jubilee yielded very modest results. Pope Leo XIV did not officially receive the rainbow pilgrims and made no mention of them during the jubilee audience. 

Someone justified the uncomfortable silence by claiming that the pope skipped the LGBT event because he holds jubilee audiences every other week, and that Saturday was his off week. Not to mention that the following Sunday saw the canonization Mass of Carlo Acutis and Pier Giorgio Frassati—an event to which the pope clearly (and understandably) chose to give far greater prominence.

Nevertheless, journalist Diane Montagna accurately reconstructed how the internal rules, although clearly stated, were not enforced, and La Tenda di Gionata day turned into organizational chaos and an embarrassing spectacle—despite being downplayed by the Vatican Curia so as not to further embarrass the pontiff.

In the days leading up to the LGBT Jubilee, Montagna had asked the Vatican for clarification regarding the use of rainbow symbols, receiving vague answers or none at all. Although the Dicastery for Evangelization had prohibited partisan flags and banners, rainbow crosses, drapes, and LGBT flags were seen during the event—even inside St. Peter’s Basilica—without any intervention from organizers or volunteers. A Belgian priest even wore a ‘cape’ that bore the symbol of the intersexual movement. The rules existed, but they were not enforced.

Montagna also asked whether the Vatican intends to acknowledge its mistake and apologize for the scandal caused to the faithful, especially in light of the photographs circulating online showing the rainbow cross inside the Vatican Basilica. “This was entirely preventable,” she wrote on X, “but nobody cared.”

All of this, first and foremost, confirms the truth of what was already denounced years ago by Pope Benedict XVI and recorded by Peter Seewald in Letzte Gespräche: that within the Vatican there exists and operates “a gay lobby, a network of prelates” which not only influences internal dynamics but openly aims to dismantle Catholic doctrine on family and homosexuality.  Joseph Ratzinger—whether out of clerical prudence or benign naivety—downplayed the issue, saying it involved “four, maybe five people” and that they had been “dismantled” following the Herranz investigation. Facts have shown that this assessment was overly optimistic: not only has the problem not been resolved, but it has grown under Francis to exert considerable influence over ecclesial bodies and official events.

Second, the tension that currently divides the Curia and Leo XIV becomes clearly evident. On one side stands the Pope—a calm and reflective man, not inclined toward forceful actions or media-driven gestures—who seeks fidelity to doctrine while embracing a prudent pastoral gradualism. On the other side is a curia still steeped in the Bergoglian spirit, ready to manipulate symbols and events to project an image of “continuity” with the Francis era, even at the cost of misrepresenting the thought and actions of the new Pontiff.

This is also demonstrated by the recent interview-book by Father Antonio Spadaro, which—despite being framed under the banner of fidelity—persistently promotes the idea of Leo XIV being substantially aligned with his predecessor, especially on matters of morality and environmentalism. It is an evident strategy: using the pope as a tool of legitimization for pre-established theological and political agendas, without concern for what he truly thinks or desires.

The (current) Curia and the pope pursue very different goals: the former seeks to push the Church in a progressive direction, while the latter aims to safeguard unity—or rather, cohesion. Yet this strategy, within an institution like the Catholic Church, risks becoming a double-edged sword. Here, unity is not a political compromise, but the fruit of a clear, perennial and shared doctrine. For this reason, attempting to ‘hold together’ two opposing visions—one traditional, the other progressive and even contrary to orthodoxy—risks deepening division, as it scandalizes and confuses both clergy and faithful, and further wears down the ecclesial body already strained by twelve years of conflicts under Francis.

The LGBT Jubilee on September 6th served as a litmus test: an event conceived and imposed by the institutional apparatus, downgraded at the last minute in an attempt to contain the scandal, yet still allowed to unfold in a disorderly manner and in violation of established rules. It is a sign of a divided ecclesial body, where the head and the limbs do not always move in unison. For the faithful, there remains the bitterness of seeing the Vatican desecrated by rainbow crosses and ideological symbols without anyone having the courage to stop the outrage.

The LGBT Jubilee day was merely the latest piece in a mosaic that reveals the weight of the homosexual lobby and the fragility of internal safeguards. Meanwhile, on September 13th, the Vatican is set to host the concert Grace from the World, featuring Karol G as guest of honor—a media icon and ideological symbol of the LGBT movement. This is yet another sign that certain ecclesial circles prefer to bow to worldly trends rather than preach the Gospel.