The Eastern Rite of the Catholic Church has had married priests for a thousand years. And no women priests.
How far down the slippery slope of heterodoxy you going to roll?
Celibacy is a discipline, not a doctrine, so there's no heterodoxy involved.
You are right in what you say, of course, celibacy is a discipline and not dogma.
And there are pros and cons to both sides of celibacy. But it has served the Latin Church well... I think of Padre Pio and wonder if he could have lived the life he did while married and raising a family.
The thing is, it seems that *most* supporters of a married clergy also support a female clergy as well. Plus a more democratic form of Catholic Church. So usually, all of these issues are intertwined to some degree. And it's kind of like the Texas sodomy case of last week... knock down one thing and then another and where does it stop? I also believe the reason celibacy has evolved the way it has is that Jesus Christ is indeed at the helm. But it is doctrine and not dogma because we have had some holy and pious married converts over the years who have made the leap from minister to priest - the doctrine of celibacy permits that. Celibacy as a dogma would not.
The celibate priest who is the head of my parish is always asking for money for this and that, as is each and every priest and bishop. Right now our regular parish account stands at $750.00 after all the bills for the month have been paid. Thank God the priest doesn't need money for dancing lessons, piano lessons, groceries for a family, an addition for all the kids, lunch money, and money to clothe a family. And I left out all the small sundry expenses we all have when we have kids and a wife.