He certainly does have a point.
If "acting in the person of Christ" means celibacy is integral to the priesthood, then no priest anywhere would be married.
We know that that is not the case. So "acting in the person of Christ" does not require that the priest himself must be celibate, as Christ was.
Clearly you're not appealing to the tradition of the Latin rite, but to rite-changers or other faiths?
Is this a point of dissent with the magisterium for you?