You obviously typed this snippet. I read this last week in the CFN, and it was very long. I went looking for it online, but couldn't find it.
It is a compelling article and raises the warning flags we have gotten so used to lately. But I'll tell you the truth, I don't fully understand what it's all about.
I know what the author is trying to alert us to, but even he writes that in the new document we are told that homosexuals are not to be admitted to seminary or be ordained.
Maybe I missed it in the article, because it is so long, but what exactly are the loopholes that would permit homosexuals to come pouring into the Church legally, like Mexicans crossing the border?
Like the Mexicans, the homosexuals don't need an engraved invitation, both are coming in at will anyway.
I would hate to write those letters to the Pope, et al, unless I understand precisely where the danger is coming from in the new document.
I have already written on this in another thread, and my conclusion was that the dangers were in the nuanced loopholes.
"...what exactly are the loopholes that would permit homosexuals to come pouring into the Church legally...?"
I do not pretend to know about what is being done "legally." But like I started to explain in the comment following the truncated article which I typed in here, in this diocese, anyway (and since Mahony was buddies with Cardinal Bernardin of Chicago who died in the middle of a sex scandal, it's probably all over the country, if not the world), I know from personal experience that at St. John Seminary in Oxnard, CA, they have been expelling good seminarians who are caught being too traditional for many years. I have personally met some and have heard their story. What are the offenses that warrant expulsion? Watch:
1. A seminarian caught learning Latin on his own (all Latin studies were expunged long ago) was put on the list.
2. Any seminarian caught studying the Traditional Latin Mass propers, rubrics or trappings was put on the list.
3. Any seminarian found praying the Rosary or encouraging others to pray the Rosary was put on the list.
What was the "list" for? A record of the seminarians was kept, and those on the "list" were tailed most maliciously. Anything they did that could be used as grounds for dismissal was prosecuted to the hilt. Of course, a homosexually inclined seminarian could do the same things and nothing would come of it. Remember this is AFTER the prohibition for letting them in in the first place. They should not have even been there to begin with, but now they were being given preferential treatment!
The offenses used were things like habitual tardiness, disrespect for authority, missing appointments, wearing inappropriate clothing, being in prohibited areas or talking out of turn. That way, the fact of institutionalized discrimination AGAINST good and faithful candidates to the priesthood WOULD NEVER GET RECORDED.
I doubt you will likely find much written on this, but you can listen to the GOOD MEN who were oppressed by this corrupt institution.