This is perfectly in line with the teachings of +Paul. The Orthodox Church, always applied oikonomia even in this instance -- for practical reasons lower clergy (caretakers of churches) who are really bishops' assistants, are allowed to marry prior to taking Holy Orders. Once ordained, should they become widowed, they can not marry as long as they are ordained priests.
Also, deacons can be married in the Church of the East and the West. I wish the Catholic Church would use some flexibility, as it does for priests who came from Protestant ministries who were already married. Such priests are allowed to remain married. Also the Eastern-rite Catholic priests are allowed to be married (I believe the bishops are not, but I am not sure). Flexibility would go a long way. It is not without a precedent, and it may help specific parishes.
You are right, this is not our issue to get involved in. I just wanted to clerify some of the potential misunderstandings, since Orthodoxy was brought up.
Yes, a celibate clergyman is preferable. But then who is without sin?
Odd comment.
Is marriage for clergy somehow sinful? That's a rather archaic and very Augustinian notion.
Actually, they follow the same dictates as their Orthodox brethren .... exactly! Those who wish to serve in eparchies outside of their home, must be celibate, in deference to their Latin Rite brothers. The Melkite and Ukrainian Catholic Churches have tested the waters though, when each one assigned a married priest to a US parish. So far, no comment from the Vatican. Will this 'trend' catch on? Only time will tell.
Then again, the Eastern Catholic Churches do not have the volume of congregants of the Roman churches. IMHO, it is impractical for the Latin Church to financially accomodate a married priesthood, optional or otherwise.