Why do they so not get it?
Once again, the Vatican has demonstrated that ignorance holds the day. Doesn't anybody read a dictionary? Use their brain? Think?
Since the answer is obviously 'no', allow me first to introduce some working definitions:
celibacy: abstaining from sexual relations, as due to religious vows
homosexual: being sexually attracted to members of the same sex
heterosexual: being sexually attracted to members of the opposite sex
pedophilia: an adult who is sexually attracted to children
children: immature young; applies to both males and females
If priests are to be celibate, then they are to be celibate. That means no sexual relations with men, women or children, period, regardless of sexual orientation, preference, or predilection.
A married man who engages in normal heterosexual relations with his wife, who also molests his daughters and/or step-daughters and/or any underage female child whether or not related to him, is a pedophile.
A single heterosexual man who may or may not from time engage in normal heterosexual relations with an adult female, who has a predilection for underage female children, is a pedophile.
A married man who engages in normal heterosexual relations with his wife, who also molests his sons and/or step-sons and/or any underage male child whether or not related to him, is a pedophile.
A single heterosexual man who may or may not from time engage in normal heterosexual relations with an adult female, who has a predilection for underage male children, is a pedophile.
A homosexual man, who may or may not from time to time engage in normal heterosexual relations with an adult male, who has a predilection for underage male children, is a pedophile.
A adulterer is a married man who, while still married, has heterosexual or homosexual relations with an adult man or woman.
Adulterers may be heterosexual or homosexual.
Pedophiles may be heterosexual or homosexual.
Banning homosexuals from the priesthood strictly because they are homosexual, ignores the fact that some priests have abused female children, and some have had sexual relations with adult women. It also ignores the fact that heterosexual men sexually abuse male and female children, either preferentially or indiscriminately.
Banning homosexuals will not do a damn thing to curb the abuses of priests that are assuredly still going on, nor do anything to improve the Church's or Vatican's image or relations with the young and adult survivors of priest abuse who have already come forward.
It will, however, be yet another example of the Vatican and Church turning its back on a problem rather than taking an active role in dealing appropriately with it, dragging the Church back into the Middle Ages rather than out of it.
While I have your ear, may I ask a question that has been puzzling me for some time? I understand that nuns are considered "brides of Christ", symbolically wedding Christ when they take their vows. If nuns are brides of Christ, who are priests husbands of? Or are they stand-ins for God? And why is this whole thing so creepy and smacking of misogynism and paternalism?
And, please, before you tell me "well, the bible says homosexuality is an abomination" and not to be condoned or permitted, what about all the other things proscribed in the bible? all the things we are supposed to do? Or is it acceptable for the Catholic church and fundamental Christians, like radical and fundamental Moslems, to pick and choose what they want to observe and try to force others to abide by from their respective holy books?
For instance, how about the points covered in this?
The following is from my neice, Soma. It is nice to know that, nature or nurture, some things hold true through the family tree...