No, we see that the semantics are going strong here. If no one is required to take the voluntary vow of celibacy, then how many Roman Catholic men who opt not to take it become priests in the Roman Catholic Church?
What's that you say, none?!?!
Sounds like a required vow then. If you disagree, show how it is now.
You wrote:
"No, we see that the semantics are going strong here. If no one is required to take the voluntary vow of celibacy, then how many Roman Catholic men who opt not to take it become priests in the Roman Catholic Church?"
The vow is not forced on anyone. Someone who chooses FREELY to not take the vow will usually not be ordained. The same is true in the Orthodox Churches in that they do not ordain men and THEN have them marry. A few years ago a Greek Orthodox bishop said that the GO church might have some celibate priests soon because so many seminarians were having trouble finding wives. Once ordained the men would not be able to marry. We are no different. Only we rarely ordain a man who does not elect to take a vow of celibacy.
"What's that you say, none?!?!"
Incorrect. A handful a year. No more.
"Sounds like a required vow then. If you disagree, show how it is now."
All vows are binding only if they are voluntary. The vow of celibacy is voluntary. The Church's decision to ordain is voluntary. If the Church chooses to ordain, then she does. If not, not. If a man elects not to take a vow of celibacy, and the Church is not interested in ordaining married men or unmarried men without a vow of celibacy, then she doesn't ordain them.
There is no vow forced on anyone. Men are chosen for the priesthood. No one is forced to become a priest. No one is forced to take the vow. The Church is not forced to ordain anyone.
Refute any of that if you can. Of course, you can't. Calling it semantics without demonstrating how it is supposedly untrue is not an argument. It is a distortion and an evasion. It's also all you've got.