I think I know why. Maybe it is because the Church WOULD LOSE at least half of their priests and would be in severe shortage for the masses.
I just think if the Church has no problem accepting Homosexual men, why not women??
I would think women would be focused on word of God just as much as a Homosexual man if not more so.
I think since Pope Benedict has come on the scene the seminaries have been instructed to not admit homosexualists, as they are intrinsically disordered.
“I just think if the Church has no problem accepting Homosexual men, why not women??”
Apart from theological reasons, conservatives should be glad that women aren’t accepted as priestesses because ALL the Catholic women who want to become priestesses are flaming liberal whack jobs who dig baby butchery and think “gay marriage” is spiffy. The clergy as is definitely leans left, and the homosexualist clergy no doubt leans farther, but not consistently as far left as the women who want to become priestesses.
Freegards
There was a dreadful period in the American church when the "lavender mob" controlled quite a few seminaries. I fault the Vatican for failing to come down like the doom of God on those guys, but there are reasons (not excuses but reasons) why they were reluctant to move.
1. There's a long tradition in the U.S. of screaming loud and long about 'interference' from Rome. It dovetails with the strong anti-Catholic political tradition here that goes back to the Know-Nothings and even earlier. It made Rome reluctant to take strong action for fear of causing problems.
2. JPII looked at the problem from the point of view of an orthodox, conservative anti-Communist Pole. For years, the Polish Communist Party used false accusations of homosexual misconduct in order to get rid of priests they didn't like and keep the Church in Poland off balance. When the parties concerned loudly proclaimed their innocence, he took them at their word. A mistake, but understandable.
3. The liberal mindset (aside from 'celebrating gay pride') has always been that child molesters and ephebophiles can be 'cured'. The same liberal bishops who embraced all sorts of heretical nonsense believed the assurances from psychiatrists and psychologists ('the experts') that homosexuals could be 'cured' of trolling for adolescent boys. If the bishops had listened to the actual teaching of the Church (which has consistently taught that homosexuals should not be ordained because of the temptations that seminary life and the priesthood cast in their way) instead of the 'experts', there would have been a stronger response to this. Again, wrong but given the climate understandable.
The number of homosexual priests was still nothing like half, even in the worst period.
And in the later years of JPII the Church began a concerted effort to clean those guys out. They went so far as to hire an independent auditor to monitor their efforts, and the vast majority of dioceses are getting good reports from the auditor. There are a few problem areas, mostly where heterodox bishops are resisting any "interference" from Rome -- but those guys are reaching retirement age quickly and overall the problem priests are almost all gone now.
I recall the outcry here back in the early 80s when three priests were accused of molesting adolescent boys (that's something less than one percent of all the priests in the diocese). One was sent to prison, one was sent to a remote monastery and died there (the statute of limitation had run so he could not be convicted criminally). I'm not sure what happened to the third ultimately, but he was removed from parish work and any contact with the laity.
I researched this issue VERY carefully before we converted in 2003. We used to be Episcopalians and I didn't want to jump from the frying pan into the fire. I can tell you that I personally witnessed a lot more openly homosexual conduct in the Episcopal Church than I ever have in the Catholic Church. But the news media doesn't talk about THAT, or about what's happening to teenagers in ECUSA. After all, it doesn't fit their agenda . . . .