It would seem to me that before you accuse someone of being a homosexual that you would have to have evidence or proof. If you accuse someone of being a homosexual and do not have the proof, you can be sued for slander. There is an axiom: he who asserts must prove. Anyone can accuse anyone of anything, but if you do, you better be able to prove it. If a priest is a homosexual but does not practice it, there is no way to prove that he is a homosexual. It is only “active” homosexuals that are open to exposure. If a priest or bishop is an active homosexual, they need to go.
That's not how it works in the real world, and you know it. Slander suits are notoriously difficult to prove, and by trying to disprove it in a public fashion, the slander keeps getting repeated over and over to the detriment of the innocent victim. Sooner or later, it becomes the truth.
With that, I agree, but then, there's no need to be a priest if you can't manage to keep your vows, unless it serves as a camouflage. Otherwise, be what you are and be a good Christian. No heterosexual can run around diddling himself crazy and be a priest, either. It ain't fittin’. It just ain't fittin’. A VOW is a VOW.