So what you are saying is that the article you posted doesn't outline at all how this new docment will lead to more homosexuals. The author wrote 4,000 words on his gut feeling? His line of reasoning was "I know the doc says no homosexuals but I think they are liars so I will rake the muck."
And what was your point in posting a partial article that people can't read for themselves? Kind of leaves the rest of us at a disadvantage.
I have no intention of leaving anyone at a disadvantage. I don't know how to scan it in quickly and it's not on the website yet. But if you send the publisher $1.75, they'll mail you a reprint. Ask for reprint #1026, and give the title, "New Vatican Document to Eliminate 1961 Papal Ban on Ordaining Homosexuals."
Send to:
Catholic Family News, MPO Box 743, Niagrara Falls, NY 14302.
Or if that's too much money, send me 50 cents and I'll mail you my own reprint!
"So what you are saying is that the article you posted doesn't outline at all how this new docment will lead to more homosexuals." [I think you mean more homosexuals ordained?]
The article, in parts I did not type out, does get into the topic [that I think you mentioned] somewhat, and if that is your interest, perhaps I'll try to get more of it typed in one of these days.
The bottom line, it seems to me, is that A) this document is not yet finished, but "due for release by early fall 2005," and as such, we cannot presume to know what it will say; and B) (my own opinion) no matter how cleverly worded the thing is, there will be efforts to subvert the Catholic intent of it, however clear or vague the intent is expressed. Therefore trying to second-guess what the mechanism of their misguided effort will be is a waste of time. If the past 40 years wandering in the desert is any clue, the document will be chock full of vague language that can be interpreted in a wide variety of ways.
Near the end, the author says, "This means that in practice, according to Allen, some discretion would be left to bishops and seminary rectors 'wether a given case amounts to "homosexuality" in the sense intended by the policy.' This seems to inicate that the door is still left open. What is needed is a clear, unambiguous reaffirmation of the explicit 1961 Papal ban."
That expresses my concern very well: What is needed is a clear, unambiguous reaffirmation of the explicit 1961 Papal ban. But I do not see any such thing likely forthcoming. Call me sour grapes or whatever, but since the ban itself was criticized and ignored since it came out in 1961, why whould there be any attempt to resurrect it now? (You might not have seen my other posts regarding how Mahony has been a prominent ignoramus -- I mean has prominently ignored-- the ban, and has promoted homosexual men toward ordination. I'm not dreaming that the fact of offenses against this ban have been proliferous.) Isn't the whole theme these days to put the past behind and "move forward" into the bright new world of tomorrow? The militant homosexuals are not taking any back seat to this. They are pushing everywhere for so-called equal rights, but what they really want is to have homosexuality proclaimed as the "norm" and make heterosexuality illegal.
How about that for a wild opinion?
(Now the hecklers will jump in saying that I was criticizing something to do with priestly celibacy, which I was not - I haven't been talking about celibacy, okay??)