Surprised you didn't bring up "Luther's antisemitic writings". That would demonstrate that you are not grasping everything going on in the Reformation. Many early reformers and protestants figured out that it was NOT a good idea to badmouth Catholics, Catholicism, or peculiarly Catholic beliefs as long as the local prince (or other government head) was a Catholic, even if only a nominal Catholic.
So, they began preaching against "the Jews". That was considered acceptable. However, when you get into those sermons and you find disputations over Communion, Baptism, the nature of the Trinity, and so forth, it becomes pretty clear that these guys mostly meant Catholics where they used the word "Jews".
It's still a good idea to only bring into the priesthood men of sound morals who should otherwise be married ~ (kind of what the Orthodox do, and those guys are virtually ALWAYS married when ordained, and the community makes sure they get all the really hot babes ~ so I've heard).
>> So, they began preaching against "the Jews". <<
That's interesting, and certainly helps me make sense of Luther's "antisemitism" which never seemed consistent to me with the rest of his writings. (Nonetheless, one must recognize the moral danger of ascribing all sorts of vicious things to a third party because you know you'll never get away with making such slanderous assertions about your true, more powerful enemies... Certainly, regardless of his intent, Luther's writings did contribute to a feeling of anti-semitism which persisted for centuries and which helped "arm" Hitler's rhetoric.)
By the way, the church scandals leave me more open to the Orthodox policies. And I can say that in good, Catholic faith, since the Church does recognize their position is merely one of discipline and preference, and not an eternal, infallible teaching. I very, very much value celibate priests, however, and could easily imagine the pressures of family life could result in bad priestly priorities; medieval Russia had a different economic structure than medieval Europe or modern America. I am upset with the number of priests around here (Northern Virginia) more committed to running non-profit organizations, from the very noble (Fr. McCloskey) to the very leftist, than they are to promoting the sacraments. Married priests would surely make this worth. The only question is which is the worst outcome! But I do believe that Rome (as opposed to the apostate hell-bound perverts who run much of the American church) is now aiming for the highest idealism, and I can't begrudge them that.
Incidentally, the bible does say that celibacy is superior to marriage, and that the best should be chosen for the priesthood. The particular problem with Luther's day was that the economic structure often pressured people into the priesthood who did not sense any calling.