[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

When dealing with a highly technical, internal document of the Church (in Latin) there would be points of canon law and moral theology which would be assumed as understood by the parties intended to read it and those which required clarification. One would not expect such a document to emphasize that it is always wrong for a priest to solicit sex during sacramental Confession because that would already be understood.

Likewise, we wouldn't expect to find staff memos at CBS emphasizing that it is always wrong for a journalist or editor to lie deliberatelty in a news story. That CBS does not regularly warn its staff NOT to lie or not to slant things to suit the peculiar agenda of the secret society they happen to be a member of would not necessarily be evidence of a lack of enthusiasm for accuracy in reporting. Silence on a point in any document does not indicate that the writer holds an ethically wrong opinion on the matter.

[HapaxLegamenon]

When dealing with a highly technical, internal document of the Church (in Latin) there would be points of canon law and moral theology which would be assumed as understood by the parties intended to read it and those which required clarification. One would not expect such a document to emphasize that it is always wrong for a priest to solicit sex during sacramental Confession because that would already be understood.

This being the case, any honest journalist would ask the source what it all means, before telling the world it means something else. The fact the CBS did not ask anyone from the Congregation of the Faith (which is what the Holy Office is now called) for comment shows bias.

The fact the CBS did not asked for any help reading a Latin canonical document 40 years old shows their arrogance.