877 Years

877 years! What? I suppose a more specific title for this post would have been 877 Years of Celibacy. I decided to write this piece because I have often had people ask me, why is it that priests have this vow of celibacy and can’t get married? I usually have to correct them and tell them that it's mainly Roman Catholic priests. But, then they ask “doesn't the Bible say to be fruitful and multiply?” And I respond by saying yes, supposedly God gave Adam and Eve those instructions, according to the Hebrew Sciptures in the Book of Genesis. I add that this celibacy thing actually has not always been the case, and is more recent in the history of the Western Church. In fact, Peter who was supposed to have been the first Bishop of Rome was married. Saint Paul, however, was celibate as well as other church leaders and priest in history that also chose to be celibate. Now, with relevance to St. Peter being the first Bishop of Rome, some argue that it was really Linus, although that is another subject altogether. Eastern Orthodox priests are allowed to be married, and also Anglicans. In fact, many other clergy and pastors do not practice celibacy. So, why did I mention 877 years? I shall elaborate.

 The Church united originally had a few councils, starting with the Council of Jerusalem in the Book of Acts, and such as the Council of Nicaea in the year 325 AD. In 1054, East and West split up and the East (Orthodox Churches) only recognizes about seven ecumenical councils, to my understanding, in which the church was not divided. The Roman Catholic or Western Church continues to have councils independently such as the more recent Vatican II during the early 1960’s. In the year 1139 the Roman church had the Second Council of the Lateran. Well, you can do the math, between 1139 and 2016 there are 877 years, hence.... So, what happened in this council of 1139?

"In Lent of 1139 a general council was summoned by Pope Innocent II and held in the Lateran basilica {1}. As we know, the synod had been convoked the previous year; for the papal legates in England and Spain pressed the bishops and abbots to go to the council. Thus, a good number of fathers, at least five hundred, met in Rome. One of these came from the East, the patriarch of Antioch, but he was a Latin. With the pope presiding the council began on 2 April and it seems to have ended before 17 April, as far as we can judge from the sources (papalencyclicals.net)."

Thirty canons resulted from this council, and the following are very relevant to this post.

“6. We also decree that those in the orders of subdeacon and above who have taken wives or concubines are to be deprived of their position and ecclesiastical benefice. For since they ought to be in fact and in name temples of God, vessels of the Lord and sanctuaries of the holy Spirit, it is unbecoming that they give themselves up to marriage and impurity.

7. Adhering to the path trod by our predecessors, the Roman pontiffs Gregory VII, Urban and Paschal, we prescribe that nobody is to hear the masses of those whom he knows to have wives or concubines. Indeed, that the law of continence and the purity pleasing to God might be propagated among ecclesiastical persons and those in holy orders, we decree that where bishops, priests, deacons, subdeacons, canons regular, monks and professed lay brothers have presumed to take wives and so transgress this holy precept, they are to be separated from their partners. For we do not deem there to be a marriage which, it is agreed, has been contracted against ecclesiastical law. Furthermore, when they have separated from each other, let them do a penance commensurate with such outrageous behaviour.

8. We decree that the selfsame thing is to apply also to women religious if, God forbid, they attempt to marry (papalencyclicals.net)."

In the book Christianity The First Three Thousand Years, Diarmaid MacCulloch briefly discusses the Second Council of the Lateran. MacCulloch wrote:

“…it is true that churchmen were deeply concerned about the loss of ecclesiastical estates to possession by families; that had a further effect on the Church’s regulation of marriage…. Married clergy might well found dynasties, and might therefore be inclined to make Church lands into their hereditary property…. Celibacy set up a barrier between the clergy and the laity, becoming the badge of clerical status; at a time when everyone was being called to be holy…. (MacCulloch, p. 372-373).

I strongly suggest that you read up some more on this subject because it is really fascinating. Celibacy has been the norm or the rule in the Roman Catholic Church for 877 years, and counting. I do not know if this will change anytime soon. Moreover, I am aware that Anglican priests that convert to Roman Catholic were recently allowed by the Pope to remain married, please correct me if I am wrong…feel free to comment. I also know about Fr. Alberto Cutie, who is an Episcopal (part of the Anglican Communion) priest here in South Florida who left the Roman Catholic Church because he was in love and got married. Moreover, Fr. Albert and his wife have two children together now. To conclude, I personally do not agree with the celibacy rule, but that is just my opinion and I am not a Roman Catholic. Blessings and I hope you enjoyed reading!

References:

http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Councils/ecum10.htm.

MacCulloch, Diarmaid. Christianity: The First Three Thousand Years. New York: Viking, 2010.