Replies

There is a good book on celibacy (or, more correctly, continence) in the early church written by Fr. Christian Cochini, called Apostolic Origins of Priestly Celibacy. There are solid reasons why celibacy is a requirement of the priesthood, much like marriage is a requirement of parenthood.

No matter what this new book says, the scriptures plainly and emphatically support the idea that clergy may be married if they choose, and early church history supports it as well. If it comes down to believing what a 20th-century priest says or what the Bible says, I'll go for the Bible every time. For example, we know that Peter was married:

And when Jesus was come into Peter's house, he saw his wife's mother laid, and sick of a fever. - MATTHEW 8:14

Further, we know that other apostles -- and Jesus's brothers -- were also married. Paul indeed speaks out against clergy being forbidden to marry:

Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas? - 1 CORINTHIANS 9:5

Finally, Paul says that clergy member holding high office may (not necessarily must) be married:

This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) - 1 TIMOTHY 3:1-5

The notion of celibacy for clergy was not codified until the 1st Lateran Council in 1123, under Pope Callistus. If celibacy is a requirement of priesthood that is supposedly handed down by apostolic tradition, then why did it take over 1100 to recognize this requirement?

Enforced celibacy for clergy is a 900-year old failed experiment. It's time to quit arguing whether or not zero-tolerance is a good idea and get back to what the scriptures say.

Dear Mike,

I enjoyed your interpretation, here. However, I have a little difficulty. AppyPappy is quite insistent that clergy MUST be married. He is quite insistent that this is NOT an interpretation, but is the mandatory reading of the verse in question.

You seem pretty insistent that marriage is optional for the clergy.

I believe that you are both sincere and devout Christians, but one of you is clearly in error. Could you enlighten me as to which one of you is in error? Could you also let me know why the other is correct? And could you please cite the authority to which we can all look to be sure that we are not being led into error by one or the other of you?

Your help is appreciated.

Thanks,

sitetest

You do not begin to agree with Roman Catholics on the meaning of the word "clergy." You would be a rather rare Protestant if you believe, as we Catholics do, that clergy include only priests with sacramental powers, a member of a sacrificial priesthood, etc. There is no point in arguing over whether or not "clergy" "may", "might" or "must" marry when there is no agreement in the first place as to the definition of clergy.

Furthermore the reformation gave rise to the curious idea (at least in the history of Christianity) that all is included in the Bible (or at least in the books that reformed churches recognize) and that there is nothing beyond Scripture or in addition to it that has authority. We are to accept that Jesus Christ was incarnated, lived, engaged in His ministry, suffered, was crucified, died in atonement for our sins, rose on Easter and ascended into heaven leaving behind the Paraclete, all so that a disobedient priest of eccentric views and a yen to marry a nun would be able to come along 1485 years or so later to found Jesus Christ's Church or the first of 10,000 of them, each utterly necessary to its adherents because of nuances of difference over understandings of Scripture (which is, of course, perfectly clear in its meaning despite the existence of 10,000 differing groups of Sola Scriptura believers, each his or her own authority on Scripture because most are literate and can read someone else's translation of Scripture whichever one of many differing versions or translations) authoritatively.

If you actually believe something substantially along the lines of the history outlined above, please keep it to yourself or among yourselves or go teach it to anyone who will believe it. Define your clergy as you please. I am afraid that you will find little agreement from Catholics adequately grounded in the Faith and for good reason.