The Vatican would prefer that gays don’t come to visit.
Publisher Steinmetz clarified that what was meant by gay travel was traveling for the purpose of a visit, not as a demonstration. To this the Bishop replied, “I consider if someone is homosexual, it is a provocation and an abuse of this place. [HT: Michael-in-Norfolk]
Well … I guess they’ve got a point. It’s their club, it’s their property, and they can make any rules they like.
I am reminded, though, of William F. Buckley’s answer when taken to task for publishing articles in Playboy: Playboy, he said, has the audience that needs to read him. If the Vatican believes its storyline and is serious about saving souls, wouldn’t it make more sense to welcome gays, to perhaps even have clerics on hand to discuss the church’s position on sexuality with those who are curious, rather than opportunistically demonizing gays and banning them from their sacrosanct precincts?
And as Michael points out:
The irony, of course, is that if all the closeted gays in the Vatican bureaucracies and the Pope’s residence left, the place would be a virtual ghost town.
You can see the disconnect.
loading...
