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.
Posts
