Hus was the founder of a Christian movement. Many of his early followers were as immoral he is. So you have the foundation of a movement who was debauched and many members of the movement were just as bad.
What the priests do is beyond the pale and they have bought shame to the Catholic Institution. But whenever you think the Catholic Church was founded, you will find condemnations of homosexuality, fornication and said people should follow the Commandments.St.Pius V ordered that homosexuals should be executed. Hus was corrupt from the beginning.
Catholicism has been corrupt longer than that.
St. Peter Damian's Book of Gomorrah: Homosexual Situation Graver than Damian's Time
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/929551/posts
Ten worst popes lists.
10 of History’s Most Scandalous Popes
https://historycollection.com/10-of-historys-most-scandalous-popes/
Top 10 Worst Popes in History
https://www.toptenz.net/top-10-worst-popes-in-history.php
And the lists don't even agree!
And that's not even counting Francis who Catholics reject and yet demand Prots put themselves under the authority of in order to be saved.
Such rank hypocrisy.
But as James stated:"I will shew thee my faith by my works," (James 2:18) and Rome manifests its understanding of its own teaching by affirming even proabortion, prohomosexual, Muslim-affirming public figures as member in life and in death.
TradCaths are more likely to see censure (since Rome is to the left), and who think they are in a position to declare the liberals as incurring latae sententiae excommunication, while the most unyielding vocal TradCaths do not care what Rome says seeing as they reject the current or even all modern, popes.
And (though it matters not to them) under canon law (subject to interpretation) that is considered "a crime against religion and the unity of the Church, and thus a schismatic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication" (canon 751; 1364). - https://canonlawmadeeasy.com/2017/04/20/can-you-be-both-a-catholic-and-a-sedevacantist/
And thus you have papal statements such as,
"the one duty of the multitude is to allow themselves to be led, and, like a docile flock, to follow the Pastors," "to suffer themselves to be guided and led in all things that touch upon faith or morals by the Holy Church of God through its Supreme Pastor the Roman Pontiff," "of submitting with docility to their judgment," with "no discussions regarding what he orders or demands, or up to what point obedience must go, and in what things he is to be obeyed... not only in person, but with letters and other public documents ;" and 'not limit the field in which he might and must exercise his authority, " for "obedience must not limit itself to matters which touch the faith: its sphere is much more vast: it extends to all matters which the episcopal power embraces," and not set up "some kind of opposition between one Pontiff and another. Those who, faced with two differing directives, reject the present one to hold to the past, are not giving proof of obedience to the authority which has the right and duty to guide them," "Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent." sources
Which sect do you fit in with? Is Francis a legit Catholic and pope? What about Ratzinger? Do you affirm Vatican Two as being legitimate, doctrinal and requiring obedience? Or do you subject the veracity of modern RC teaching to your understanding of ancient RC teaching?
—> you will find condemnations of homosexuality
There are literally drug-fueled homosexual orgies in the Vatican.
~Half the priestood is gay.
What is claimed contradicts what is permitted and covered up.
It’s very sad.