Priestly Celibacy

  • Thread starter Thread starter Redratfish
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Redratfish

Guest
Today in world history, the issue of priest being celibate came up and the teacher (agnostic) mentioned that it wasn’t official until around the 1000s. I was wondering how to respond to this. I know that Paul encourages celibacy for priests, and that he himself is celibate, but is he correct about the timeline, and if so, why was the change instated?
 
Redratfish said:
Today in world history, the issue of priest being celibate came up and the teacher (agnostic) mentioned that it wasn’t official until around the 1000s. I was wondering how to respond to this. I know that Paul encourages celibacy for priests, and that he himself is celibate, but is he correct about the timeline, and if so, why was the change instated?
Click to expand...
“Those persons who are chosen to be bishops, priests and deacons are either virgins or widowers; or at least, when once they received the priesthood, are vowed to perpetual chasity.”

St. Jerome (ca. 340 - 420) Letters, 48:21

“it seems good to me that from the present day all bishops should be told not to presume to make any one a subdeacon who does not promise to live chastely.”

St. Gregory the Great (ca. 540 - 604) Letters, Bk. 1, No. 44

From The Teachings of the Church Fathers by John R. Willis, S.J.
 
First Council Of Nicaea - 325 AD

CANONS
  1. If anyone in sickness has undergone surgery at the hands of physicians or has been castrated by barbarians, let him remain among the clergy. But if anyone in good health has castrated himself, if he is enrolled among the clergy he should be suspended, and in future no such man should be promoted. But, as it is evident that this refers to those who are responsible for the condition and presume to castrate themselves, so too if any have been made eunuchs by barbarians or by their masters, but have been found worthy, the canon admits such men to the clergy.
  2. Since, either through necessity or through the importunate demands of certain individuals, there have been many breaches of the church’s canon, with the result that men who have recently come from a pagan life to the faith after a short catechumenate have been admitted at once to the spiritual washing, and at the same time as their baptism have been promoted to the episcopate or the presbyterate, it is agreed that it would be well for nothing of the kind to occur in the future. For a catechumen needs time and further probation after baptism, for the apostle’s words are clear: “Not a recent convert, or he may be puffed up and fall into the condemnation and the snare of the devil”.** But if with the passage of time some sin of sensuality is discovered with regard to the person and he is convicted by two or three witnesses, such a one will be suspended from the clergy.** If anyone contravenes these regulations, he will be liable to forfeit his clerical status for acting in defiance of this great synod.
  3. This great synod absolutely forbids a bishop, presbyter, deacon or any of the clergy to keep a woman who has been brought in to live with him, with the exception of course of his mother or sister or aunt, or of any person who is above suspicion.
 
Redratfish said:
Today in world history, the issue of priest being celibate came up and the teacher (agnostic) mentioned that it wasn’t official until around the 1000s. I was wondering how to respond to this. I know that Paul encourages celibacy for priests, and that he himself is celibate, but is he correct about the timeline, and if so, why was the change instated?
Click to expand...
Yes, he’s correct. And it’s essential to note that there have ALWAYS been married Catholic priests, it’s only the Roman or Latin Church that decided, for disciplinary (not dogmatic) reasons to limit the priesthood to celibates after the first millennium. Eastern Catholic Churches have always had married priests.

The change was made for a number of reasons.
 
Redratfish said:
Today in world history, the issue of priest being celibate came up and the teacher (agnostic) mentioned that it wasn’t official until around the 1000s. I was wondering how to respond to this. I know that Paul encourages celibacy for priests, and that he himself is celibate, but is he correct about the timeline, and if so, why was the change instated?
Click to expand...
As has already been stated, the ideal of clerical celibacy goes back to St. Paul. Married men could become priests but the preference was for celibates. Note however, that priests could not and cannot marry **after **ordination.

Various regional synods and councils began to require clerical celibacy very early on. See councils such as Elvira in Spain. It did not become the **universal **norm for the whole of the the Latin Rite until around the 1000s. Your teacher is correct there.

It wasn’t that there was a “change” instituted as much as a recognition that this was the norm throughout the West via various local councils, bishops, etc, and the Pope undertook to make it uniform. The Western bishops believe this to be the best way to live out the call to the priesthood. It is disciplinary, not doctrinal, but it is a part of Western spirituality the way the married priesthood is part of the Eastern.

This article gives a good overview of the historical progression:

newadvent.org/cathen/03481a.htm
 
Berean2 said:
He does? :confused:
Click to expand...
Uh, yeah, he does:

1 Corinthians 7: 7-8 I would that all men were even as myself; but every one hath his proper gift from God … But I say to the unmarried and to the widows, it is good for them if they so continue, even as I.

1 Corinthians 7: 32-35 But I would have you to be without solicitude. He that is without a wife is solicitous for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please God. But he that is with a wife, is solicitous for the things of the world, how he may please his wife: and he is divided. And the unmarried woman and the virgin thinketh on the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and spirit. But she that is married thinketh on the things of this world how she may please her husband. And this I speak for your profit, not to cast a snare upon you, but for that which is decent and which may give you power to attend upon the Lord without impediment.
 
1ke said:
As has already been stated, the ideal of clerical celibacy goes back to St. Paul. Married men could become priests but the preference was for celibates. Note however, that priests could not and cannot marry **after **ordination.

Various regional synods and councils began to require clerical celibacy very early on. See councils such as Elvira in Spain. It did not become the **universal **norm for the whole of the the Latin Rite until around the 1000s. Your teacher is correct there.

It wasn’t that there was a “change” instituted as much as a recognition that this was the norm throughout the West via various local councils, bishops, etc, and the Pope undertook to make it uniform. The Western bishops believe this to be the best way to live out the call to the priesthood. It is disciplinary, not doctrinal, but it is a part of Western spirituality the way the married priesthood is part of the Eastern.

This article gives a good overview of the historical progression:

newadvent.org/cathen/03481a.htm
Click to expand...
Clerical celibacy was not addressed by St. Paul.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top