Fr. James Martin, S.J. On The Abuse Scandal

First of all, nearly every reputable psychologist and psychiatrist, not to mention almost every scholarly study, decisively rejects the conflation of hom@sexuality with p@dophilia, as well as any cause-and-effect relationship. The studies are almost too numerous to mention. 

Link (here) to read in context the above quote of Fr. James Martin, S.J. at In All Things

To read a total contradiction to this line of thinking read Steven Baldwin's, CHILD M@LESTATION AND THE H@MOSEXUAL MOVEMENT 

The Vatican document on h@mosexuals and seminaries (here)

Some excellent criticism (here) by George Weigal with an excerpt below, read the John Jay Report # 1 and the John Jay Report #2

Eighty-one percent of the victims of s@xual abuse by priests are adolescent males, and yet this has nothing to do with homosexuality? Perhaps it doesn’t from the clinicians’ point of view (especially clinicians ideologically committed to the notion that there is nothing necessarily destructive about same-s@x behaviors). But surely the attempt by some theologians to justify what is objectively immoral behavior had something to do with the disciplinary meltdown that the report notes from the late 1960s through the early 1980s; it might be remembered that it was precisely in this period that the Catholic Theological Society of America issued a study, Human Sexuality, that was in clear dissent from the Church’s settled teaching on fo@nication, self-abuse, and hom@sexual acts, and even found a relatively kind word to say about be@tiality. And is there no connection to be found between the spike in abuse cases between the mid-1960s and the early 1980s, with its victimization of adolescent males, and the parallel spike in hom@erotic culture in U.S. Catholic seminaries and religious orders in that same period?

To read a blistering attack on the "New Morality" published in the book entitled "Human Sexuality" by the Catholic Theological Society of America go (here)