>>725305
Celibacy was both recommended by Our Lord and St. Paul. You impute problems to the Church that have as their source the surrounding, debased culture of sexual liberation and death.
>Meanwhile, boys who are submissive, obedient, sensitive, non confrontational and asexual are considered perfect Christians and potential future priests.
The actual virtues in question are chastity and humility, which are incumbent on all men, not only the clergy. On the other hand, effeminacy has always been considered a vice:
>Effeminacy in the classical tradition is seen as a kind of "softness." The Latin, mollities, means literally "softness", but in various contexts can also mean irresolution, tenderness, wantonness, voluptuousness, weakness, or pliability. It essentially occurs when the traits traditionally associated with the feminine are found in the man. The sum of these traits in a man constitute the vice of effeminacy, which St. Thomas, following Aristotle, says is a opposed to the virtue of fortitude. The effeminate man is he who is incapable of "manning up" and enduring the challenges of life. St. Thomas notes how this is opposed to fortitude or perseverance:
>"Perseverance is deserving of praise because thereby a man does not forsake a good on account of long endurance of difficulties and toils: and it is directly opposed to this, seemingly, for a man to be ready to forsake a good on account of difficulties which he cannot endure. This is what we understand by effeminacy, because a thing is said to be "soft" if it readily yields to the touch" (STh, II-II, Q. 138, Art. 1).
The problem is with the West, certainly not the Church, who has to make do with the sorry examples of men available to her at present.
http://unamsanctamcatholicam.blogspot.com/2015/08/the-vice-of-effeminacy.html