As a matter of personal opinion, priests know what they are getting into before they are ordained.
I think that [celibate] priests are in short supply. I heard that in N. Maine, a known "problem" priest was
allowed to continue ministering, among other things, because there is a shortage of priests, and they could not
get anyone to live there.
I think the goal is to allowed married priests to perform ecclesiastic duties is that you increase the supply
of people willing to do the job.
I believe John McLaughin is a priest. Jesuit maybe. Left to get married, I remember. I think he's still a priest.
Can't perform any duties, though.
It is not only a matter of your personal opinion, it is the crux of the whole discussion. If you don't want to be celibate, find something else to do. There certainly are hundreds of opportunities for employment should a man feel the need to dedicate himself to the service of others. If the seminaries weren't so hungry for candidates, they would be able to weed out the incompetent and homosexual seminarians before they receive their Holy Orders and send them packing.
A priest is a different kind of man, his celibacy separates him from the rest of us. It's a sacrifice he promises to make that ordinary men are incapable of. I want an extraordinary man, one who makes a promise that he can keep, in spite of his human impulses. It strengthens him if he's worthy and holy. If he fails, defrock him and send him on his way. Those who do fail do not stain the priesthood, they only disgrace themselves. And those who engage in cover-ups and pay-offs are equally disgraced. Go away, Cardinal Law. Go away weak and feckless Bishops. Wake up Vatican - it is your tacit approval of these practices which allowed this awful situation to deteriorate into the crisis we are now faced with. The "Clown Masses" and the terrible liberalization of the Church were the warning signals that Rome failed heed. Was it worth the 1.3 billion dollars of hush money that the Church has had to pay in the last 40 years?