I disagree with this article. Please see the links in the next post.
If you are upset reading this, I don't blame you. I am too. But I don't understand your "disagreement." I did not type out the whole article which comes to 3 full pages in 10 point type. I think it's about 4,ooo words. Perhaps if you read the whole thing you will have a different reaction. What I mean is, there's more information in the complete edition, which is currently only available if you buy the Feb. CFN, and that's not found on any newsstands. You have to order it from the publisher or find some guy who carries a stack of them to Church on Sunday.
Are you disagreeing with the facts reported, or are you presuming they are inaccurate, or is it some opinion of the author you dispute? I never got so far as the Commentary portion, which is about 1,ooo words long.
Regarding your links, these largely address another topic, namely sacerdotal celibacy. That is not the issue of this article. The 1961 document says that the evil tendencies to homosexuality or pederasty are grounds for not being admitted in seminary, all presuming from the start that celibacy would be practiced. In other words, even a celibate priest would face "serious dangers" trying to live the common life and priestly ministry, if he is afflicted with those tendencies, and THAT'S WHY he should never enter the seminary, and OF COURSE he should never be ordained.