About that homosexuality/seminary document.

My take? I don't have much of one yet.

That's because, like everyone else in the world, I haven't seen it yet. It hasn't been published, so I don't know what it actually does or does not say.

So, it's one of those things that ought to daunt prospective opiners, so to speak.

But since everyone has an opinion anyway, I'll chip in my two denarii worth.

General gut reactions are two. First, if it is as advertised (a big if), it strikes me as an overreach, banning anyone who has experienced same-sex attraction, as opposed to someone who continues to act out on that attraction. A faithful celibate priest is a faithful celibate priest.

Second, it is utterly irrelevant, inasmuch as it is committed to the discretion of the locals for enforcement. The same folks who were so determined to ordain the likes of Rudolph Kos, despite that monster's file having more warning flags than a Christo exhibit. Since it is beyond dispute that misbehavior between consenting adults is not remotely as horrid as the rape of boys, they'll ordain who they want, and if necessary, pay the harassment settlement later. No big whoop.

Your local chancery bureaucracy is the place where Vatican directives go to die. No matter how it is worded, this will join the rest in the circular file.