Oh, I see.
So you'd be happy attending Mass once a month, with a communion service on the other three Sundays?
Our failure as a nation to produce priests- should not require the Universal Church- including many nations where there is no vocations crisis to alter the structure of the priesthood.
There are few nations where vocations are plentiful. And celibacy is not integral to the structure of the priesthood. Period.
What I am saying is there is a true path to healing this problem that is not being taken- instead we talk about ways in which we can patch up the situation/
And what is that path? Look, it's not skin off my nose. I tried the seminary for several years, and celibacy is not for me. But I would think the Church would want to be able to select the best men available for the ministry. Jesus called married men to be his apostles and disciples. He can do so again.
I wouldn't be happy with it, but I would accept it as a natural consequence of a people being unable to bear the fruit of vocations.
And celibacy is not integral to the structure of the priesthood. Period.
Neither is it incidental. Christ encourages 'eunuchs for the kingdom.' (Matthew 19:12) Also, Paul encourages those who are able to remain celibate to do so as they may more faithfully serve the Church. It may not be necessary for the priesthood- but I would take issue with anyone who would say it is not ideal.
I would think the Church would want to be able to select the best men available for the ministry.
The idea of a vocation is not that the Church selects from a pool those it considers the most promising . The idea is that God calls certain men and the vocation of those men is merely confirmed by the Church. Furthermore, those who God calls are very often the last we would expect- He takes those who are lowly and exalts them.
Our job is not to seek out better candidates- but to create a environment of faith whereby those who have been called will have the courage to respond.