End celibacy and bar on married priests, or risk having none

The traditionalist seminaries that are having to turn men away would like a word. 

Even in the mainstream Novus Ordo environment, young priests and seminarians, at least in the decadent, dying West, skew heavily traditionalist/conservative/orthodox.  And they love them those cassocks.  Some are even into lace.  (Horrors!)  And they don't necessarily want to become fluent in Spanish and Vietnamese before they are allowed to study Latin.  Those little scamps!

And I am optimistic that as secular prospects for happiness dwindle for young men (well-paying jobs, marriage, ability to sustain a family, and so on), some will come to see the priesthood as a viable alternative.  "Oh, but a vocation has to be pure, and not motivated by anything other than the sheer love of God" --- well, ultimately it has to be about that, but I'm of the philosophy that Almighty God often nudges us into where we need to be, by circumstances that are not what we would choose, and good attitude follows good behavior.  Though it's not an exact analogy, I can see that in my own life right now.  For the first time in my life, I am morally certain that I am precisely where I need to be, doing precisely what I am supposed to be doing --- caring for my mother in what are probably her final days, not in a nursing home with often-indolent staff who care for you when it's convenient for them (we saw enough of that in my mother's rehab, they left her alone, crying, scared, and depressed, for hours), total strangers, taking every penny you have.  I am so thankful that I am retired, not on the other side of the country, not answerable to a wife and a passel of kids (just the one, and he's almost grown), in good health myself, it's as though I was placed in these circumstances.  (I'm also getting the opportunity to atone and do penance for not always having been the best son in the world.  What goes around comes around.) Perhaps God does likewise with young men who have a "failure to launch".  Who can say?

And maybe I'm the only one who sees this, but "back in the day", fidelity to Catholic teaching on marriage actually made it less attractive than it is for many today --- natural methods of conception avoidance were very crude and heavily prone to failure, and someone contemplating marriage had to deal with the likely prospect of having several children, the man busting his hump at possibly some very hard factory job, the wife having to stay at home and care for all those kids (thankfully, you could still trust any and all Catholic schools in those days, and the abundant religious vocations ensured a steady supply of teaching sisters who worked basically for room, board, benefits, and a small personal stipend (I think it was $20/month for the sisters who served my school, to buy personal care items and so on, that'd be more like $80/month now, still far lower than any salary)), and when child-having just got too much to stand, then it had to be total abstinence, possibly for many years.  Add to that, if a woman did remain single in secular life, her job prospects were severely limited, it was basically nursing or teaching, and not everyone is suited to those fields.  (My dear grandmother, not Catholic, had six children and was widowed at age 38.  She had no education and three children still at home to raise, she had to clean house for people and made knitted goods that she sold door-to-door.)  Contrast that with the most respectable line of work imaginable, you get a good education for free, all your basic needs in life taken care of, absolute job security, the only thing you have to give up is marriage and a degree of personal freedom, but aside from that, pretty good life if you ask me.

This McAleese woman has absolutely nothing to recommend her. I am completely uninterested in any statement she would ever make on anything.
If I want to hear about married priests, I am more prone to listen to actual priests, bishops, even deacons.