>> Homosexuals infiltrated Catholic seminaries in the 1970s. The damage has not been fully undone. <<
Sorry to say, that isn’t true. By the close of Vatican II, the sex abuse was already in full throttle. If there’s a relationship between the post-Vatican reforms and an invasion of liberals or sexual deviants, the it’s that the deviants caused the post-Vatican reforms, and not the other way around.
Even Martin Luther seems to be referring to homosexual perverts when he attacks celibacy. I believe he was victimized, triggering his sexual incontinence and zealotry. I take the fact that he is vague about what he refers to as a sign he is hesitant to reveal what he is ashamed of, inclining me to think that there is something really there, as opposed to his mostly wicked slander; it seems otherwise strange for a slanderer to refuse to divulge accusations.
I don't know. Who has numbers? Certainly, there are deviants in every profession, including ministers and teachers. The rate of sexual abuse by Catholic priests appears to be comparable.
Two things stand out about the most recent wave of publicity regarding sexual abuse of minors by Catholic priests; that the abused were overwhelmingly male teens, and that some bishops shuffled the abusers around.
I've read that the shuffling around of abusers dates back to the '40s and '50s, but I'm not aware of the magnitude of the practice. But homosexuals entering the priesthood seems to be fruit of the sexual revolution of the '60s. It would make sense, since nuns were rocked by feminism at about the same time.
I think Michael Rose traces the homosexual infiltration of the seminaries to the late '60s as well. Certainly, he emphasizes the use of psychological testing as a means of weeding out orthodox heterosexual seminarians by homosexual clergy. This didn't happen on a large scale until the 1970s, when modern psychology washed over society, and the seminaries.