[pgkdan]

As one bishop put it to me, the policy against ordaining homosexuals is already clear -- the only interesting question is, what do you mean by a "homosexual"?

The bishops point is nonsense and a direct attempt to cloud the issue. The document states that "homosexual men and men with homosexual tendencies are not fit to receive Holy Orders." Any conscious adult with an IQ greater than his foot size knows what that statement means.

[BulldogCatholic]

More post Vatican II wishy washy do whatever we please garbage. There is canon law in place since 1961 forbidding the ordination of homosexuals, the only problem is that homosexuals fit very nicely into the new order of things, liberal, open to woman ordination, the New Mass, leanings towards modernism and Protestanism. They will never be expelled and the church is in disgrace cause of their sins with payouts of $1B and counting here in the US to date

[ninenot]

"Cloud the issue..."

Most likely the quoted Cardinal Grace-with-Lace meant to spray a little perfume on the issue--plenty to spare near the hot-tub, you know...

[maryz]

and a direct attempt to cloud the issue.

Well, yeah. How can you "keep the dialogue going," as they say, if you insist on finality?

[maryz]

Any conscious adult with an IQ greater than his foot size knows what that statement means.

Curiously enough, from what I read, they have no trouble spotting "homophobes"!