[eastsider]

I concur that the causal arguments connecting celibacy with perversion are absurdly naive and that they should be promptly defeated, although not at the expense of what IMO are the legitimate conditional arguments. My apologies for having misconstrued your post.

P.S. I spewed my tea when I read "teenophilia." LOL! : )

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

I just find it a little interesting that while some liberals in the media want to focus on celibacy, they are afraid of the homosexual issue. Most of the orthodox and conservative voices who have discussed the scandal have mentioned a new laxity on homosexuality which came into fashion in the 1970s really. Both Richard Neuhaus of First Things and Deal Hudson of Crisis have alluded to this in their publications. I do think that the idea that there is nothing wrong with unconventional sexuality, which came out of the sexual revolution, has something to do with the aggressive behavior in question. The book Goodbye Good Men also has something to say about this. If that book is correct, the disproportionate number of homosexuals and sex deviants has more to do with liberals turning away orthodox and normal heterosexual seminary candidates.

So perhaps the question needs to be broadened to include this. Have orthodox applicants (without homosexual orientations)been rejected by liberals in charge of seminaries and religious orders? Why? Were the people who rejected them homosexuals or pro-homosexual? Who appointed them in such positions of authority? Are there any bishops or, have there been any bishops, who have dealt favorably with active homosexuals for some reason other than just a desire to cover up scandal? The answers to these questions might prove illuminating. Are there any church leaders in the U.S. with enough courage to face up to them? To avoid these and try to throw all the focus on celibacy seems a tad obscurantist and dishonest, if not ideologically biased. It also does not take into account the large numbers of good men who gave up on entering the priesthood in the U.S. because the church here has been so distorted by liberalism, neo-modernist nonsense, liturgical minimalism, socialism-as-Catholicism, and so forth. It would be interesting to know whether that number is higher than orthodox candidates who gave up because of celibacy or other reasons.

But when the suggestion of married priests is offered, the current diviorce rates and adultery rates ought to be considered. I'm not so sure that a married Richard McBrien, for instance, is necessarily going to lead the American Catholic Church into the pneumatic eschatological paradise that some people envision.