Etymology Gay = Come from the Latin GAUDIUM (I STILL DON'T KNOW WHY FRANCIS CHOOSE THIS NAME ??? EVANGELII GAUDIUM

The Anglo-Saxon term gay today is synonymous with homosexual GAUDIUM comes from the Latin "JOY" "happy" where GAI was formed: It comes from French or, gai "cheerful" or "festive". Latin gaudium: happy, joy, pleasure of the senses.

When you're not faithful every day in your marriage you are an adulterer, when a priest or any christian violates the First Commandment "YOU SHALL HAVE NO OTHER GODS BEFORE ME" simply that person falls into IDOLATRY AND APOSTASY .
Matthew 4:10
Jesus said to him, “Away from me, Satan! For it is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.’

"YOU SHALL WORSHIP THE LORD YOUR GOD AND HIM ONLY SHALL YOU SERVE"
CCC Said 2110 : The first commandment forbids honoring gods other than the one Lord who has revealed himself to his people...
2112 The first commandment condemns polytheism. It requires man neither to believe in, nor to venerate, other divinities than the one true God. Scripture constantly recalls this rejection of "idols, [of] silver and gold, the work of men's hands. They have mouths, but do not speak; eyes, but do not see." These empty idols make their worshippers empty: "Those who make them are like them; so are all who trust in them."42 God, however, is the "living God"43 who gives life and intervenes in history.
2113 Idolatry not only refers to false pagan worship. It remains a constant temptation to faith. Idolatry consists in divinizing what is not God. Man commits idolatry whenever he honors and reveres a creature in place of God, whether this be gods or demons (for example, satanism), power, pleasure, race, ancestors, the state, money, etc. Jesus says, "You cannot serve God and mammon."44 Many martyrs died for not adoring "the Beast"45 refusing even to simulate such worship. Idolatry rejects the unique Lordship of God; it is therefore incompatible with communion with God.46

It has literally been years since I read the writings of the sociologist Peter Berger on problems of religion and modernity. Berger, a liberal protestant, was interested sociologically in the deterioration or difficulties of religion in modern times. He concluded that the leaders (e.g., priests, rabbis, imams, etc.) develop an "ecumenical" mind-set as they find themselves DOING the same things, e.g., tending the flock (short for the administrative activities), an activity that is in itself non-dogmatic, just a result of belief application. The common "doing" becomes the "glue" of their mutual interaction. The dogmatic differences fade into the background. In this way a bonding arises, a sharing of experiences (e.g., visiting each other's worship houses), that transcends dogmatic loyalty to their specific beliefs. Such a bonding can bring the different "priestly" casts and their bureaucracies into conflict, indeed, scandalous conflict with the normal believers of the different confessions who experience the differences. Certainly, the popes since Vat II, have pushed an ecumenicalism that often seems like a syncretism (?), i.e., a mixing of religions. Pope John Paul II and his meetings at Assisi (what is the name?) with all kinds of religious types, being blessed by a shaman or an Indian Chief. And Pope Francis is, in the "Spirit" of Vat II, is accelerating ecumenical indifferentism from ABOVE with a increasing scandalization of those below of a traditional bent. Pope Francis (followed by his like-minded "boys" in the priesthood), in contradiction to his namesake, is more tolerant of and friendly towards representatives of other religions than to traditionalists. Why?

No abstract answer here. I hold as the key to understanding the events unfolding in the "Spirit" of Vat II the fundamental doing away with the Latin Mass. I say "doing away", not allowing some vernacular expressions in the liturgy. Why? The Latin Mass was the liturgical expression of an integral theological body of beliefs, seen in Pius X and XII. Liturgical expression and belief system are or were united! It is just this "unity" that was dissolved, i.e., opened up to novelties, when the Latin Mass was repressed. Catholicism finds itself in a transitional phase which, as Pp Francis has said, has not fully enacted the intent of Vat II. The underlying moment of Vat II is the affirmation of the modern world in the sense of seeing all religions as somehow valid expressions of God. "Ecclesia Christi subsistit in ecclesia catholica" replaces "ecclesia Christi EST ecclesia". ("Subsistit in" means effectively "sets up camp in" >> various positioningsby others are possible.) Here we have the "cultural war" going on in the Church. Traditionalists will experience more and more scandals. That is my prediction.

Finally, @yuca2111, you do not cease to amaze me. You plead not to lose heart. Good advice. Alas, I often feel that I am losing my mind, my intellectus, as the "esse ecclesiae" is dismantled step by step, both liturgically, scandalously and "off-the-cup" theoretically.