Yeah, I’m either still not understanding or still not agreeing with you.
Are you saying that unmarried clergy is not a disciplinary issue?
The limitation of Holy Orders to celibates is, of course, a “disciplinary” matter. But like virtually all disciplines, it is directly and closely related to “doctrinal” issues.
The doctrinal basis for the discipline is the Church’s understanding of the Eucharist. And the discipline is not, at root, that clerics must be celibate, but that they must be CONTINENT.
And the requirement of CONTINENCE applies to married clerics as well as the unmarried.
Currently, the vast majority of Catholics, including clerics, believe that the cleric’s duty to be continent is a consequence of his being unmarried. I.e., the duty to be continent is simply a consequence of the fact that all unmarried men are required by the Sixth Commandment to be continent.
This is false. The duty of clerical continence is a direct consequence of proximity to the altar in the Eucharistic sacrifice. Thus, all deacons, priests, and bishops are bound by the duty of perpetual, perfect continence.
http://canonlawblog.blogspot.com/2011/01/canon-277-and-clerical-continence-in.html
http://canonlawblog.blogspot.com/
http://www.canonlaw.info/a_deacons.htm