[ThomasMore]

Christian Cochini’s The Apostolic Origins of Clerical Celibacy surveys and analyzes the practice of celibacy in the early Church. From the fourth century we find widespread (although not unanimous) evidence that the Church indeed ordained married men, but expected them to refrain from relations after marriage. Early Christians felt great (although perhaps not totally warranted) confidence in the ability of Christians to remain continent within and outside marriage.

I'm as orthodox as they come, and accept, with reservations, the discipline of celibacy. But it is just that; a discipline and not doctrine. The celibacy issue should first and foremost be separated from this sex scandal issue. The scandal is due to infidelity, not celibacy.

That said, I have a real problem with Cochini's book, which I have read, in that it basically states there is something 'impure' about the sex act even inside of marriage. My poor mother, God rest her soul, was plagued with the idea that sex was 'dirty'. This came from what was being taught by nuns and priests. And this idea, which is a left over from Levitical times, in no way squares up with what Pope John Paul II wrote of in 'Theology of the Body'.

I believe that celibacy is a wonderful gift to those who can accept it. It does leave the man completely free of the burden of wife and children. And I would not be one to say eliminate the discipline of celibacy. But I also see room for the 'already married man' in the priesthood. It would add another dimension that, in the latin rite, is missing. Normally I get flamed for holding this view; but I would do a grave injustice to all the already married priests in the eastern rite and in the latin rite, as well as the 25000 married deacons in the latin rite.

I guess my difficulty is understanding, within the context of the marriage covenant, the need for continance before the Eucharist. I am only reminded by Cochini that it has to do with purity!

[Siobhan]

The scandal is due to infidelity, not celibacy.

Precisely right.

I have it from my morning e-mail that we must brace ourselves for a detailed dossier on an American cardinal to be released shortlly. It will detail his homosexuality, his lies, his 'associations' and his complete infidelity to his ordination vows.

[sinkspur]

I guess my difficulty is understanding, within the context of the marriage covenant, the need for continance before the Eucharist. I am only reminded by Cochini that it has to do with purity!

St. Augustine didn't help things either, with his view of sex as something selfish and only tolerated for procreative purposes.

Of course, he came to this position after he'd gotten all that selfish sex out of his system as a youth.

[RobbyS]

Remember that even Our Lady submitted to purification. In any case, such rules may have originated in the desire to give women a kind of "grace" period when they could be free from the demands of their husbands!

[Gophack]

Very well-thought out post. I couldn't agree with you more.

[Catholicguy]

That said, I have a real problem with Cochini's book, which I have read, in that it basically states there is something 'impure' about the sex act even inside of marriage. .

I too own the book. Where does Fr. Cochini say that?

[Catholicguy]

I guess my difficulty is understanding, within the context of the marriage covenant, the need for continance before the Eucharist. I am only reminded by Cochini that it has to do with purity

It really wasn't that long ago that is was not uncommon for the laity to abstain from conjugal relations the night prior to receiving Communion.