T
Toten
Guest
When, Where, and Why did the Catholic Church bring in the Practice of Clerical Celibacy and why does the Catholic Church maintain the practice?
- Status
F
Friar_David_O.Carm
Guest
The Catholic Church also maintains the practice of a married secular clergy. Just look at the Eastern Catholic Churches.
T
Toten
Guest
If you don’t mind me asking, what is “Secular Clery”?
J
jmcrae
Guest
Secular clergy are members of clergy who are not attached to any monastic order. (Members of monastic orders in the first and second order are required to be celibate, whether or not they are members of clergy. Third orders may be married.)
In the East, married men may be ordained to the priesthood as long as they are not already third order members of any monastic orders.
In the West, we ordinarily ordain only single men. (There are some very rare exceptions to this, and usually there are serious pastoral reasons for making these exceptions.)
No one, whether in the East or in the West, may marry after ordination.
Priestly celibacy in the West has been the norm since at least the 10th century, and was widely practiced prior to that, since Apostolic times. Christ Himself was celibate, and so were most of the Apostles.
B
BobP123
Guest
Why? Probably because Christ asked His Apostles to leave their families and come follow Him?
M
Malcolm_McLean
Guest
There is tendency, because the value of celibacy is under attack, to read too much into mandatory celibacy for priests. It is just a rule, of similar status to the rule that priests may not carry on business.
The rule against running businesses obviously makes sense. If the priest is always popping off to London for meetings with his stockholders, then the parish will necessarily suffer. Also, if someone disapproves of his business practises it could bring the church into disrepute.
In the case of celibacy, the two motives were to prevent the formation of a priestly caste, and to reduce the temptation on a priest to sequestrate Church real estate. These are still valid, but now we see celibacy more as a way of discouraging unsuitable candidates, and keeping the priest married to his ministry. Recently it has also been a powerful witness against a sex-obsessed culture.
Celibacy is an inherent part of the monastic life, and quite a high proportion of monks are ordained. However not all monks are priests and not all priests are monks.
T
Toten
Guest
I wasn’t attacking it, I was sust curoius.
C
Cavaille-Coll
Guest
Perhaps there is a better forum for this one, unless clerical celibacy has some liturgical or musical implications, such as a pastor forming a choir from his own children and his wife is playing the organ.
G
Godfollower
Guest
One minor quibble: in the West (I don’t know about the East), deacons may occasionally marry after ordination. The example that comes to mind is the deacon with several small children who is suddenly widowed. Sometimes the Church will allow him to marry again (despite his clerical status – and in fact keeping that status) for the sake of having a helpmate to assist with the children. Needless to say, this is a very rare occurrence, and it isn’t a right; it’s an occasional dispensation.
J
jmcrae
Guest
I was not aware of that exception. I was also under the impression that men with young children were usually encouraged to wait until they get older before being ordained to the Diaconate - ?
H
Hellisreal
Guest
Read some of the threads here and you will see the organ is out and tamborines and harmonicas are the new thing.Perhaps there is a better forum for this one, unless clerical celibacy has some liturgical or musical implications, such as a pastor forming a choir from his own children and his wife is playing the organ.
Urrrgh.
G
Godfollower
Guest
Probably. But that doesn’t account for the deacon who is blessed with children after ordination. Again, this (remarriage after ordination as a deacon) is not a common occurrence.
Your point is a good one; I wonder whether this is why the Church generally prefers permanent deacons to be in their 30s or more, and well into their marriage as well. After all, a 22-year-old in his first year of marriage with one child on the way might have other things on his mind and not be as desirable a candidate for the diaconate as a 42-year-old, 20 years into his marriage, with three kids all in their teens.
J
jmcrae
Guest
Keeping in mind that the Diaconate is a volunteer position in the Church, the 22 year old also has to spend his productive time building up his career and making wise investments, so that when he reaches his 40s or 50s, he can afford to take the time off needed to spend time at the Church fulfilling his functions as a Deacon.
Having small children at home, together with building up a career, is not a recipe for the kind of spare time that a Deacon needs to have, and this is aside from the possiblity that his wife could die, leaving him in charge of the little ones, so I think there are all sorts of reasons why they are asked to wait until they are more mature.
G
G_S
Guest
Celibacy has been around since the early Church. It was not introduced later on. The Eastern Church practice was a relaxation of discipline dating to the Council of Trullo in 692.
A diocese that encourages men to wait to apply for diaconate until their children are older is not thinking with the mind of the Church. When I was accepted at age thirty, we had four children age five and under. Our fifth was born in our first year of formation and we have had a child since ordination. I was ordained at the earliest possible age and have had the wonderfully undeserved privilege of serving as a deacon for over twenty years. There is nothing in history, tradition, or documents that justifies the idea of building up a career and making investments before starting on the diaconate path. Also, I have served in full-time, paid ministry for my entire diaconate. Canon Law states that a deacon who chooses to work in full-time ministry, is to be given a salary sufficient to support his family. The other model could be called the “Hey, Pete, catch some more fish for a few years and then follow me” model.
A diocese that encourages men to wait to apply for diaconate until their children are older is not thinking with the mind of the Church. When I was accepted at age thirty, we had four children age five and under. Our fifth was born in our first year of formation and we have had a child since ordination. I was ordained at the earliest possible age and have had the wonderfully undeserved privilege of serving as a deacon for over twenty years. There is nothing in history, tradition, or documents that justifies the idea of building up a career and making investments before starting on the diaconate path. Also, I have served in full-time, paid ministry for my entire diaconate. Canon Law states that a deacon who chooses to work in full-time ministry, is to be given a salary sufficient to support his family. The other model could be called the “Hey, Pete, catch some more fish for a few years and then follow me” model.
A
Andreas_Hofer
Guest
While those two motives are the stock answers about mandatory celibacy, I wonder if they are any more helpful than the other standard lines about medieval Catholicism like “the Inquisition killed milliions of people.” We know that the West had a tradition of celibate clergy and that celibacy had been seen as the ideal and even norm for a while before the popes managed to enforce the norm. So maybe your two motives are the straws that broke the camel’s back, but I suspect the issue was far more complex.
I
Ilroy
Guest
I heard a priest talking about this subject recently. He told a story about a seminarian who was talking to him at about 11:00 P.M. concerning a problem he was having with accepting priestly celibacy. The priest who was counciling him simply told him that if he were married, he would be at home with his wife at that time of night instead of being free to help this young man with his issues. That is one clear example of the wisdom of priestly celibacy.
There is scriptural evidence that this is a good discipline to have also, although not a doctrinal issue.
Mt. Ch. 19:
10 His disciples say unto him: If the case of a man with his wife be so, it is not expedient to marry.
11 Who said to them: All men take not this word, but they to whom it is given.
12 For there are eunuchs, who were born so from their mother’s womb: and there are eunuchs, who were made so by men: and **there are eunuchs, who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven. He that can take, let him take it. **
Also, St. Paul talks about how he wishes that all could be like him in his celibacy…paraphrased and no time to find the exact quote.
There is scriptural evidence that this is a good discipline to have also, although not a doctrinal issue.
Mt. Ch. 19:
10 His disciples say unto him: If the case of a man with his wife be so, it is not expedient to marry.
11 Who said to them: All men take not this word, but they to whom it is given.
12 For there are eunuchs, who were born so from their mother’s womb: and there are eunuchs, who were made so by men: and **there are eunuchs, who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven. He that can take, let him take it. **
Also, St. Paul talks about how he wishes that all could be like him in his celibacy…paraphrased and no time to find the exact quote.
J
JimR-OCDS
Guest
My understanding is that mandatory celibacy for the priesthood in the Latin Rite, was officially declared about 800 years ago. At the Lateran Council. Much of it was prompted by inheritance and Church property.
I wonder if the mandate should be lifted? However, there would have to be a drastic change in the ministry of the priesthood, for it to work.
The one thing that keeps me from jumping on board of the married priest bandwagon, is that you know here in the United States, that if a married priest and his wife were to divorce, the ex-wife’s lawyers would be coming after the Church for property and money.
Jim
I wonder if the mandate should be lifted? However, there would have to be a drastic change in the ministry of the priesthood, for it to work.
The one thing that keeps me from jumping on board of the married priest bandwagon, is that you know here in the United States, that if a married priest and his wife were to divorce, the ex-wife’s lawyers would be coming after the Church for property and money.
Jim
G
Godfollower
Guest
Not to worry. She’d only be entitled to a share of her ex-husband’s income and wealth – not those of the Church. It’s no different than the office manager of a multinational corporation getting divorced: the ex doesn’t get a share of the corporation’s assets. She would get a share of his pension (if any), and she might be entitled to have him pay for health insurance, etc.; but the employer never has to pay anything extra (e.g., if the priest ex-husband had a pension from the Church, the Church would be ordered to pay to the ex-wife a percentage of whatever the priest is supposed to get – but not until the priest is in fact supposed to get it, and in no event more in total than the priest otherwise would have received). In fact, the employer is always held free of any claim by the employee’s ex (the one exception, of course, is when the employer is owned by the ex – like a partnership, etc. – which the Church clearly is not).
S
srp643
Guest
R
Reader_Arsenios
Guest
I thought that the requirement of celibacy for the priesthood was NOT a matter of decision by any of the first 7 Ecumenical Councils… And that it was simply an additional requirement added by the western Church for its own internal reasons… Are you saying that the entire undivided Church of the first thousand years actually required a celibate priesthood, but that only Rome was obedient to this requirement??
The Eastern Church has had married clergy since dirt was young… How many of the Apostles were married? And which ones?
Arsenios
- Status