CELIBACY AND THE PRIESTHOOD - 30 Questions and Answers

zna ^ | January 25, 2013 | John Flynn, LC

[NYer]

ROME, January 25, 2013 (Zenit.org).

Why can’t priests marry? It’s a question people often ask and the requirement of celibacy has also been blamed as one of the causes of sexual abuse by priests.

A recently published translation of an Italian book addresses the topic in a question and answer format, “Married Priests? Thirty Crucial Questions about Celibacy” (Ignatius Press). It is edited by Arturo Cattaneo, with contributions from a wide variety of scholars.

We are faced with a great educational challenge in explaining the Church’s teaching on priestly celibacy, admitted Cardinal Mauro Piacenza, prefect of the Congregation for the Clergy.

He likened celibacy to marriage. "The underlying logic of priestly celibacy is the same one we encounter in Christian matrimony: the total gift of everything forever in love."

From the historical aspect the book noted that Christ chose celibacy for himself even though among the Jews this state of life was seen as a humiliation. He did not generate children physically but loved his disciples as brethren and shared a common life with them.

Jesus' way of communicating life was not through physical generation but spiritual. Therefore the celibacy of those who follow Jesus in the priesthood must be understood in the perspective of this spiritual transmission of eternal life.

One of the questions deals with the affirmation that celibacy did not become obligatory until the Middle Ages. For a start, the explanation noted, there is considerable Biblical evidence, both in the Gospels and the letters of St Paul, of support for celibacy as a sign of witness.

While it is true that during the early centuries married men were ordained, after their ordination they were expected to practice continence and those who were single at ordination or those widowed after ordination were not permitted to marry once they were priests.

All deacons, priests and bishops, the explanation continued, had to refrain from sexual activity from the day of ordination. "Nowhere in the Church can it be proved that a married cleric legitimately begat children after his ordination."

Over time the Church realized that continence for married clerics was problematic regarding the sacramentality of marriage and so during the Middle Ages this led to the decision of requiring priests to be single.

Vocations

Why not allow married priests in order to attract more vocations? This, the book observed, is one of the most frequent arguments regarding celibacy. There is no evidence, however, "that requiring less of candidates to the priesthood leads to increased numbers of them," the answer replied.

"Experience proves the contrary instead: vocations to the priesthood flourish and multiply when the radical gospel message is welcomed consistently and unapologetically."

The requirement of celibacy is not a dogma, another section of the book admitted, but this does not mean it is a merely disciplinary measure. Celibacy means that the priest should be similar to Christ and live as he did.

Jesus regarded himself as the “Bridegroom” of the whole community of believers. The explanation referred to Paul’s letter to the Ephesians (5:21-33) that uses the image of marriage for the union between Christ and the Church.

Is not celibacy unnatural and the cause of crises among priests? In the answer to this question the author, in this case Manfred Lütz, a doctor of medicine in psychiatry, explained that the question is based on an erroneous premise. What about all the people who are unmarried – are they all unnatural?

The celibate life only becomes unnatural when being single turns into isolated selfishness or narcissism, Lütz continued.

Spiritual life

From his experience as a therapist Lütz said that crises among clergy do not come from celibacy, but rather from the drying up of the spiritual life.

A subsequent question also dealt with this theme of psychological equilibrium. It was answered by André-Marie Jerumanis, a priest and physician.

Celibacy, he explained, is not harmful to equilibrium or maturity if we take into account that it is a free choice of a psychologically mature person.

A human being is not just a mere bundle of instincts. Instead, as a person we have an intellect, a will and free choice, which makes possible self-control.

"The more humanly and spiritually mature a person is, the more perfectly he will practice continence at the psychological level, not as frustration but as perfect freedom exercised in self-control and in complete availability to his personal mission," Jerumanis explained.

In another question Jerumanis dealt with the accusation that celibacy is a causal factor in sexual abuse. It would be rash to come to this conclusion, he affirmed, just as it would be rash to conclude that marital crises are due to the requirement that marriage be indissoluble.

Another contributor noted that no one would blame the institution of marriage as being responsible for a parent sexually abusing their child. He also observed that sexual abuse is just as prevalent in churches that have married clergy and that by far the largest number of cases of sexual abuse occurs in the immediate family.

These explanations and the other questions and answers make this book a valuable resource at a time of continued debate over celibacy.

[MeOnTheBeach]

I'm surprised that anyone that says they're Christian would even go near a practice like that.

1 Tim 4:1-3
1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;

3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

1 Tim 3:2
2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

1 Cor 11:11
11 Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord.

Errr...seems that the Apostle Paul was very clear on this subject. Paul straight up says that forbidding to marry is a doctrine of the devil. I don't see how you get around this.

[NYer]

Errr...seems that the Apostle Paul was very clear on this subject.

Err .. 1 Cor 7. St. Paul clearly identifies the state of virginity or celibacy as a state that is better than the state of marriage.

[MeOnTheBeach]

Does Christ have a bride or Not?

Matt 3:15
15 And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.

The New Testament is hardly a fraction of all the events that happened before, during, and after Jesus was alive on the earth.

If what's actually in the New Testament is to be taken literally, then yes, Jesus was married. Which fits because God Himself married Adam and Eve. Marriage = good in the eyes of God.

And if Paul's statement of...
1 Cor 11:11
11 Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord.

... is to be taken literal, then Jesus, in order to be an example to His followers and in His own words, "fulfill all righteousness"... would have taken a wife.

[NYer]

The church is the bride of christ. According to St. Paul, Christ has “won” his bride, the Church, by giving his life for her, “the greatest possible demonstration of love.”

[MeOnTheBeach]

Err .. 1 Cor 7. St. Paul clearly identifies the state of virginity or celibacy as a state that is better than the state of marriage.

No he doesn't, not even close. Nearly all of chapter 7 is dedicated to defining the relationship between husband and wife.

But to be inclusive he includes words to the unmarried and the widow.

Paul's words must be taken in the context of all the instruction given by Jesus and the other Apostles on the subject of marriage. They have to fit together. And saying that Paul is teaching that not being married is better than being married contradicts pretty much the whole Bible.

I think it's wiser to view Paul's words to be meant for people based on their individual circumstance are not married at that time versus an institutional doctrine of forbidding a class of people to not be married at all.

[NYer]

Paul's words must be taken in the context of all the instruction given by Jesus and the other Apostles on the subject of marriage. They have to fit together. And saying that Paul is teaching that not being married is better than being married contradicts pretty much the whole Bible.

Are you suggesting that celibacy is unbiblical, or even unnatural? That every man must obey the biblical injunction to "Be fruitful and multiply" (Gen. 1:28); and that Paul commands that "each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband" (1 Cor. 7:2).

[hosepipe]

The church is the bride of christ. According to St. Paul, Christ has “won” his bride, the Church, by giving his life for her, “the greatest possible demonstration of love.”

---

I see, so you may think this “implys” Priests and Nuns should fall in love with and marry the CHURCH”? or even Christ!..

Wouldn’t that be adultry?.. there are several other words for that...

[MeOnTheBeach]

Are you suggesting that celibacy is unbiblical, or even unnatural? That every man must obey the biblical injunction to "Be fruitful and multiply" (Gen. 1:28); and that Paul commands that "each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband" (1 Cor. 7:2).

I'm saying that the doctrine of forbidding people, any people to marry, is not only unbiblical, it is literally instituted by the devil.(1 Tim. 4:1)

1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith,

The faith spoken of is Paul's faith or "Christianity". The time frame is the "latter times" or the last days.

How many churches in our time (or anytime), call themselves "Christian" and have any doctrine of forbidding to marry? Who else could Paul be seeing in his vision?

[NYer]

I'm saying that the doctrine of forbidding people, any people to marry, is not only unbiblical, it is literally instituted by the devil.(1 Tim. 4:1)

You are mistaken. In fact, the Catholic Church forbids no one to marry. No one is required to take a vow of celibacy; those who do, do so voluntarily. They "renounce marriage" (Matt. 19:12); no one forbids it to them. Any Catholic who doesn’t wish to take such a vow doesn’t have to, and is almost always free to marry with the Church’s blessing. The Church simply elects candidates for the priesthood (or, in the Eastern rites, for the episcopacy) from among those who voluntarily renounce marriage.

[NYer]

I see, so you may think this “implys” Priests and Nuns should fall in love with and marry the CHURCH”? or even Christ!..

Huh? Where did you get that idea? Religious serve Christ through a vocation within the Church.

[MeOnTheBeach]

You are mistaken. In fact, the Catholic Church forbids no one to marry.

Semantics. You cannot be a leader in the Catholic Church and be married.

Paul is not saying don't do this and you'll be ok. Paul has seen a vision of the last days. He talks about this further in 2 Tim 3.

2 Tim 3:
1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.

Paul is following the pattern that God has set from the beginning and that is to explain the signs and wise people will understand and heed them.

Jesus Himself gave several warnings, such as Matt 7:21-23. About people that think they are walking with Jesus, but He says they are not and He will cast them out at the judgement.

Paul gives a sign so that the wise will make the connection and not fall into that dilemma. This particular sign is "forbidding to marry".

Paul said he saw another church that "abstain from eating meat". That's the Seventh day Adventists. I'm sure he saw tons of churches or maybe all of them and their various doctrines. So he briefly commented on a couple.

IMO, this is prophesy come true and says to me that yes, Paul was a true Apostle and prophet. And it's not just some game, it's real.

We can discuss this further if you'd like, but probably in another thread. I don't know any Catholics in my personal life, so it's interesting to discuss these things and get your perspective.

[hosepipe]

Huh? Where did you get that idea? Religious serve Christ through a vocation within the Church.

---

Playing dumb don’t work with me.. Man up!...

[NYer]

You cannot be a leader in the Catholic Church and be married.

I beg to differ. The Eastern Catholic Churches have married priests.

Paul is not saying don't do this and you'll be ok. Paul has seen a vision of the last days. He talks about this further in 2 Tim 3.

Dear friend, the topic of this thread is Celibacy and the Priesthood. You have bypassed the topic and moved on to Paul's letters to Timothy on a multitude of topics. In 2 Timothy, Paul urges Timothy to protect the community from the inevitable impact of false teaching (2 Tim 2:14-3:9), without fear of the personal attacks that may result (2 Tim 3:10-13). It recommends that he rely on the power of the scriptures, on proclamation of the word, and on sound doctrine (2 Tim 3:14-4:2), without being troubled by those who do not accept him (2 Tim 4:3-5).

Back to the topic of this thread, it is important to note that Paul lead a celibate life. So far from "commanding" marriage in 1 Corinthians 7, in that very chapter Paul actually endorses celibacy for those capable of it: "To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is well for them to remain single as I am. But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion" (7:8-9).

It is only because of this "temptation to immorality" (7:2) that Paul gives the teaching about each man and woman having a spouse and giving each other their "conjugal rights" (7:3); he specifically clarifies, "I say this by way of concession, not of command. I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has his own special gift from God, one of one kind and one of another" (7:6-7, emphasis added).

Paul even goes on to make a case for preferring celibacy to marriage: "Are you free from a wife? Do not seek marriage. . . those who marry will have worldly troubles, and I would spare you that. . . . The unmarried man is anxious about the affairs of the Lord, how to please the Lord; but the married man is anxious about worldly affairs, how to please his wife, and his interests are divided. And the unmarried woman or girl is anxious about the affairs of the Lord, how to be holy in body and spirit; but the married woman is anxious about worldly affairs, how to please her husband" (7:27-34).

Paul’s conclusion: He who marries "does well; and he who refrains from marriage will do better" (7:38).

[MeOnTheBeach]

Paul even goes on to make a case for preferring celibacy to marriage: "Are you free from a wife? Do not seek marriage. . . those who marry will have worldly troubles, and I would spare you that. . . . The unmarried man is anxious about the affairs of the Lord, how to please the Lord; but the married man is anxious about worldly affairs, how to please his wife, and his interests are divided. And the unmarried woman or girl is anxious about the affairs of the Lord, how to be holy in body and spirit; but the married woman is anxious about worldly affairs, how to please her husband" (7:27-34).

Paul’s conclusion: He who marries "does well; and he who refrains from marriage will do better" (7:38).

Your interpretation of this passage totally contradicts 1 Cor 11:11

11 Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord.

Paul is not prophesying nor is he speaking for the Lord here, he's simply conversing. He's consoling the unmarried not instructing everyone to not be married. You're discounting the whole Bible. It's a logical fallacy. You have greater evidence that points away from your conclusion but you ignore it.

God Himself proclaims three people in the Bible as being perfect; Abraham, Noah, and Job. There is no higher state of spirituality or faith than being called perfect by God Himself. All three of these men were married. Abraham even had two wives at the same time and God pronounced him perfect.

Therefore, you cannot conclude that being unmarried is better in the eyes of God. These men could not be perfect if there was a better state to be achieved.

Jesus said:

Mark 10:7
6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.

7 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;

8 And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.

Being married is God's intent for all people.

You are correct in that the topic is celibacy and the priesthood. How can you discuss this topic and not discuss the prophetic warning against those that practice it?

[MeOnTheBeach]

I don't mean to press the issue, but I was really hoping for an answer on this topic.

How many churches in our time (or anytime), call themselves "Christian" and have any doctrine of forbidding to marry? Who else could Paul be seeing in his vision?

If you don't mind, Paul was relating his vision of the last days. What churches in our time have any doctrines that require a person to not be married? I can only find one. Do you know of another?

[daniel1212]

George T. Dennis SJ of Catholic University of America stated, “There is simply no clear evidence of a general tradition or practice, much less of an obligation, of priestly celibacy-continence before the beginning of the fourth century.”

Peter Fink SJ agrees saying that underlying premises used in book, Apostolic Origins of Priestly Celibacy, “would not stand up so comfortably to historical scrutiny”. Dennis says this book provides no evidence that celibacy had apostolic origins.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clerical_celibacy Dennis, George T. SJ on Cochini, The Apostolic Origins of Priestly Celibacy (book review), Theological Studies, 52:4 (1991:Dec.) p.738

“Books about the priesthood,” America. New York: July 4, 1992. vol 167, issue 1, pg.17, 3pgs.]

And as we seen (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2966953/posts?page=311#311), men such as Augustine saw marital sexual relations as unclean (despite Heb. 12:4), though sin was not imputed, the Second Lateran Council - 1139 A.D. also termed such relations as impure, being inconsistent with being “temples of God, vessels of the Lord and sanctuaries of the holy Spirit,” and and under her presumptive binding and loosing powers, annulled marriages made by clerics (after their ordination) due to it being against ecclesiastical law (which required consecration to celibacy if not married, which ended up making what was an exception in the NT church to be the norm):

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

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

It is also interesting that church burial, ecclesiastical funerals, were denied knights who died in recreational tournaments, but today being proabortion, prohomosexual will not exclude you from that.

[CynicalBear]

>>Err .. 1 Cor 7. St. Paul clearly identifies the state of virginity or celibacy as a state that is better than the state of marriage.<<

When did that become “forbidding”?

[metmom]

1 Timothy 4:1-5 Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, 2 through the insincerity of liars whose consciences are seared, 3 who forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods that God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. 4 For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, 5 for it is made holy by the word of God and prayer.

[CynicalBear]

There are so many times I see evidence like that I wonder why can’t those that have fallen for the deceit of the Catholic Church see the error? That’s another one that leaves no way to misunderstand the intent of that verse.

[NYer]

What churches in our time have any doctrines that require a person to not be married? I can only find one.

Really? Which one? I can't think of any. I do know a young couple who were married in the Baptist Church, despite advising the minister they did not plan on having children. That would never happen in the Catholic Church. Refusal to have children is against the laws of God.