sideration is this: although “not all”nhomosexuals are predatory, the BoynScouts cannot afford to play sodomynroulette.nOver the past five years the Scouts,nwho receive annual revenues of aboutnninety million dollars, have been orderednto pay approximately fifteen millionndollars in damages resulting fromnsexual abuse complaints. About sixtyncases of abuse are reported each year,nin spite of the rigorous screening tonwhich the Scouts submit applicants fornleadership posts. Imagine the litigationnexplosion that could result if representativesnof the Queer Nation (or thenNorth American Man-Boy Love Association),neager to teach youngstersnabout the “positive aspects” of homosexuality,nwere given stewardship overnScout units.nThere are signs that some Scoutsnhave already been reeducated. PaulnHudson, an 18-year-old Scout, hasnsuccessfully demanded that Scoutnunits in the South excise the Confederatenflag from its insignias and refrainnfrom displaying it during Scout gatherings.nHudson, a young white man whonclaims Southern ancestry reachingnback three centuries, explains that henbelieves the use of the Confederatenflag may discourage black youths fromnparticipating in Scouting. “The [numbernof times] the Confederate flag isnshown during [Scouting] events is verynprominent,” complains Hudson. “Nonone’s wearing white hoods on theirnheads, but it almost looks like a resegregationnrally or something.”nIt remains unclear whether thosenScouting units from the several statesnwhose state flags incorporate the Confederatenflag will have to accommodatenHudson’s demands.nWilliam Grigg is a columnist for thenDaily Herald in Provo, Utah.nFor Immediate ServicenCHRONICLESnNEW SUBSCRIBERSnTOLL FREE NUMBERn46/CHRONICLESn1-800-877-5459nRunning thenPsychosocialnGauntletnby Anne Marie MorgannThe Bureaucracy ofnGetting IVIarriednTo prepare couples for the sacramentnand life of matrimony, RomannCatholic canon prescribes sensiblenrequirements for “Pastoral Care andnWhat Must Precede Celebration ofnMarriage.” According to Canon 1063,n”Pastors of souls are obliged to see to itnthat their own ecclesiastical communitynfurnishes the Christian faithful assistancenso that the matrimonial state isnmaintained in a Christian spirit andnmakes progress toward perfection. Thisnassistance is especially to be furnishednthrough: Preaching . . . personal preparationn… a fruitful liturgical celebrationnof marriage . . . assistance furnishednto those already married.” AndnCanon 1064, “It is up to the localnordinary to make provisions that suchnassistance is duly organized.”nThroughout the ages, couples havenbeen accustomed to complying withnuniversal theological guidelines as ancondition for the sacrament of marriagenwithin the Church. A recommendedncourse of religious study and spiritualncounseling with a priest have been thennorm in most dioceses for many years.nBut modern “provisions” made by localnordinaries in many dioceses throughoutnnnthe United States are a far cry fromnwhat the historic Church had in mindnfor constructive premarital preparation.nIn these dioceses, “preaching” andn”personal preparation” have been transmogrifiedninto a strange hybrid of psychologicalntesting, marriage counselingnbased on quantified, computerized testnscores, and compulsory weekend retreats.nIn some parishes, priests unfamiliarnto the engaged couples dispense counseling,npreaching deteriorates intonpsychobabble, and sociology displacesntheology. Intended couples discover tontheir amazement that they must shouldernan unwelcome, very modern burden:nrunning a gaunflet of psychosocialnprerequisites as a condition for marriagenwithin the Church.nThe most common and novel prerequisitenfor marriage today is personalitynor compatibility testing, conductednduring a couple’s six- to nine-monthnengagement waiting period. Parishesnchoose from a variety of investigativendevices with names such as “Pre-MarriagenInventory,” “Prenuptial Investigation,”nor “Focus Test.” The detailednexams consist of a battery of declaratorynstatements, with which the examineesnagree or disagree by fill-in-thedots—-orna series of interrogatory statements,nto which they must give writtennanswers. Each person must take thentest separately, and no consultationnbetween the pair is permitted. If thencouple refuses to take the inventory ornexam, then they are refused marriagenwithin the Church — unless they cannfind a diocese that does not requirentesting.nThe results are tallied, as one localnchurch official explained, “by an objectivenmachine somewhere.” Usually angraph is compiled showing the percentagenof agreement between thencouple on each inventory category. Ifnmost of the categories show indicatorsnof high agreement—between the 85nto 100 percent marks — then the pair isnconsidered to be “compatible.” Afternthe results are compiled, the priestndiscusses them at length with the betrothed.nMany of the broad categories listednin the inventories read like somethingnout of a college freshman Psychologyn101 textbook: role adjustment, personalnadjustment, interpersonal communication,ninterests and activities, marriagen