Am I Missing Something Here?
But the most curious thing in the long dialogue is this. The Cardinal was speaking about the definition of homosexual tendencies which are "deeply-rooted" (profondamente radicate) and, ergo, render a man inadmissible to priestly formation.
Here's my translation, from the original Italian, of this snippet -- I almost fell over when I heard it:
Evidently, when we speak of 'profoundly (deeply) rooted tendencies,' this means that there are times when these can be transitory tendencies or transitory cases which do not constitute an obstacle [to the sustenance of the vocation and the man's remaining in the seminary]. For example, an uncompleted adolescence, some kind of curiosity; or perhaps accidental circumstances, a drunken state, maybe particular circumstances like a person who was imprisoned for many years. In these cases, homosexual acts do not come from a rooted tendency, but are determined according to the circumstances. Or, these acts are done because one wants to obtain some sort of advantage... these acts, in those cases, do not provide for a 'profound tendency' but are given of other transitory circumstances, and these cases do not constitute an obstacle to seminary admission or to holy orders. However, where these cases exist, they must cease at least three years prior to one's ordination to the diaconate.OK, so there we have:
2. Sexual favors
4. "Accidental circumstances" (Some accident that is.)
6. Momentary Immaturity
In the eyes of the man responsible for implementing this Instruction, the above-mentioned circumstances do not inhibit a man's vocation. In other words, this dog won't hunt.
I don't know about you, but for me that screams two words: WIGGLE. ROOM.
Now, just so you boys stay on the safe side, don't do a damn thing. Keep up with your new favorite pasttime: figuring out which office I was Capo ufficio in during my previous incarnation....