As Mr. Thompson points out, in many parts of the world it\’s more honoured in the breach than anything else.
In some parts of the world it\’s heterosexual marriage, in others the discreet \”housekeeper\” approach (a favourite in rural Ireland for a long, long, time) and today in urban areas homosexuality of a more or less discreet kind.
But the real argument against said requirement for celibacy is the way it came about in the first place. It was power politics, not anything to do with doctrine.
As the Church became a large and powerful landowner then there was concern that the inheritance of church property would lead to the fragmentation of that power. The answer thus being to not allow marriage among the officers of the Church. Any children that were begot (and it was indeed common) would be by definition illegitimate and thus not able to inherit.
This is not, to put it mildly, a concern of the current Church.
In essence, a sensible and reasonable thing to do would be to go back to the division pre-11 th and or 12 th centuries (it was around then, can\’t quite recall). The monastic orders are celibate, the priesthood in general is not.