Priestly Celibacy

Emanuel Valenza

THE CRY for a married priesthood among Catholics is yet another sign of a desacralized understanding of the priestly office—and still another concession to Protestants. The signs are myriad. Many priests no longer wear simple black garb with Roman collar. It is unfashionable. They prefer to parade around in suits or more casual attire, such as sports coat or a sport shirt. Heck, if a layman can wear what they please, why not priests? After all, aren't we all priests? Isn't the distinction between ministerial and general priesthood disappearing? Doesn't the priest "preside" over the "liturgical assembly" just like his "separated brethren"? Doesn't he offer the sacramental "meal" on a table as does a Protestant minister? Don't many priests believe that only bread and wine are consumed during the "meal"? Isn't the Church "the People of God"? Given this Protestant—and hence non-sacral—belief in the priesthood and its functions, the clamor for priests who not only dress like laymen but who should be able to father a brood of children and hold jobs like them, is seen in its proper light.

With Modernists doing everything possible to turn Catholicism into Protestantism—in the name of "dialogue," of course—one aspect of priestly celibacy is, needless to say, never mentioned, namely the abolition of clerical celibacy is a logical outgrowth of the tenets of Protestantism; that is, the rejection of priestly celibacy flows organically from beliefs in justification through faith alone, the universal priesthood, and the identity of original sin and concupiscence.

Although a married clergy is called for by virtue of Protestant tenets the same is not true of Catholicism. Despite the lack of an intrinsic necessary connection between the priesthood and celibacy, as is evident from St. Paul's words in I Tim. 3:2 and Titus 1:6, and the practice of Eastern ecclesiastics, nevertheless it is true that clerical celibacy is called for as a proper and fitting consequence of the doctrines of Catholicism and has always been affirmed as such by the Church.

The Protestant belief in justification by faith alone precludes an ordained priesthood, the Sacrifice of the Mass—indeed, most of the Sacraments. Priests, as intermediators between God and man who "offer gifts and sacrifices for sins" (Heb. 5:1), are superfluous. In short, there is no difference between priests and laymen—save that the former publicly minister and teach. A more accurate capsulation of this Protestant tenet than "the priesthood of all believers" is "the laity of all believers." Now if there is no difference between a priest and a layman in their respective vocation and function within the Church; if a priest is just "one of the guys," so to speak, then there is no reason why he should not be allowed to marry.

Another consequence of belief in justification by faith alone which renders a celibate clergy all but ridiculous, is the elimination of asceticism. In fact, the belief that a person is justified by faith alone makes striving for perfection in the spiritual life not only unnecessary but impossible. For if good works are not beneficial towards justification—including the theological virtue of charity—then various degrees of sanctity do not exist, and hence striving for an increase of sanctity does not make sense. Since Protestants believe that 1) justification is the infallible conviction that by virtue of the merits of Christ God will henceforth not impute to us our sins, but consider us as just and holy men even though we truly are and always will be sinful; and since they believe that 2) justification is only the covering of sin and not its removal whereby we are sanctified through the voluntary reception of grace and truly become just men; then 3) it necessarily follows that holiness admits of no degrees. How can we become more holy when it is impossible for us to be holy in the first place? How can we be holy when we are so corrupted by original sin that our nature is inherently evil and thus all we can do is sin?

In sum: the Protestant acceptance of a married clergy is in part due to their belief that all good works—including, therefore, the attempt to attain perfection through the voluntary, disciplined renunciation of the lower tendencies of our nature—are worthless.

The Protestant identification of original sin with concupiscence necessarily leads to the sanctioning of the marriage of priests as the only means of curbing their sensual desires. Concupiscence leaves man totally depraved. Helpless, he can do no other than succumb to its stirrings. H. G. Ganss, commenting on Luther's book, Opinion on Monastic Orders, explains the heresiarch's position on concupiscence:

Luther's teaching on concupiscence is incompatible with the practice of continence. This should be kept in mind, for example, when reading the Augsburg Confession, a Lutheran creed prepared by Philip Melanchthon in 1530. The reader is left with the absurd impression that there wasn't a continent priest during the Protestant Reformation, er, Revolution. Incontinence among the clerics causes "abominable vices," "flagrant immorality," "adultery and other lechery," not to mention "disgraceful lewdness," says the creed. As such behavior is of the devil, so is clerical celibacy. St. Paul, the Confession adds, not only sanctions the marriage of priests, he "calls the teaching that forbids marriage a doctrine of the devil." Immediately following this sentence, Christ is referred to as saying much the same when He calls the devil a murderer from the beginning (John 8:44). (The Augsburg Confession, cited in Creeds of the Churches, edited by John H. Leith; Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1973, pp. 80-83.)

Various Protestant sects followed Luther's lead and supported the rejection of clerical celibacy in their respective creeds. The Thirty-Nine Articles of the Church of England were promulgated in 1563. The Second Helvetic Confession, a Reformed creed, appeared in 1566. An Anabaptist creed, The Dordrecht Confession, was issued in 1632. In 1784, The Articles of Religion, a Methodist creed, were written. These creeds defended the abolition of clerical celibacy in one of two ways: either St. Paul was appealed to as permitting it, or it was recommended only in cases where godly behavior is promoted.

To repeat: the acceptance of a married ministry among Protestants is in harmony with their basic tenets. In contradistinction, the Catholic teaching on the same subjects demands, calls for a celibate clergy as a better, more praiseworthy way of living up to the ideals of the priesthood.

Whereas the respective vocations of ministers and non-ministers are virtually identical in Protestantism—and hence both are allowed to marry—the prohibition against marriage for priests in Catholicism is in no small measure predicated upon the conviction that the priestly office is unique, more demanding, involves a higher call, and, because it entails the total consecration of one's life to God, is better practiced while celibate. The priest is "taken from among men (and) appointed for men in the things pertaining to God, that he may offer gifts and sacrifices for sins" (Heb. 5:1). His life is devoted to the things of God, not to the affairs of the world. As Christ commanded the Apostles to "make disciples of all nations," that is, to disseminate God's Kingdom, so He calls all His priests. No call is more sublime, no task more difficult. The responsibilities are great. To fulfill his sacred duties, the priest must give his all. He cannot devote part of his life to God and part to a family. Total devotion must be given to God. This is why the priestly office precludes marriage. As spousal love involves a total surrender of one's being to another, and therefore excludes as metaphysically impossible being in love with two people at the same time, so in like manner the priest's love of God entails complete self-surrender and thus precludes family life. Not only is total devotion to "the things that pertain to God" impossible once the priest is married, but he runs the risk of turning his vocation to the priesthood into an avocation; for as St. Paul says, "he who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how he may please his wife; and he is divided" (I Cor. 7:33). The responsibilities and concerns and sacrifices which are an integral part of marriage would occupy the priest and consume much time—time normally spent carrying out the apostolate. No compromise is possible. To do justice to his calling the priest must remain celibate. As in all things, Christ, the High Priest, is the model. He was unmarried. In addition, He taught that to remain a eunuch for the Kingdom of God, that is, to practice continence, is better, more praiseworthy than the married life (Matt. 19: 10-12). The Apostles, moreover, left all and followed Christ (Mk 10:28; Lk 18:28); and although most of them were married when called, for all intents and purposes, they ceased living as married men to do the Lord's will. St. Paul's words are pertinent: "For free though I was as to all, unto all I have made myself a slave that I might gain the more converts" (I Cor. 9:19).

The vow of celibacy is implicitly made during the rite of Holy Orders. In "the instruction," one of the main divisions of the rite, the bishop admonishes the ordinands, saying:

". . . preserve in your behavior the integrity of a chaste and holy life." Although "integrity" in this context means uprightness of character, the word calls to mind its strictly theological meaning which is relevant to the bishop's admonition—freedom from concupiscence. Before the Fall, Adam and Eve possessed certain preternatural gifts, one of which was integrity. God freely bestowed upon our original parents a harmonious nature: the bodily passion did not war against the will; on the contrary, the former were completely subservient to the latter. Through their disobedience Adam and Eve lost for themselves and future generations the gift of integrity. Instead of an interior harmony in man between flesh and spirit, there is tension. There is a constant struggle between the inclinations of the flesh and the desire of the will. We want to do good but we are attracted to evil. St. Paul provides a vivid description of this inner struggle in man:

As St. Paul warns that we must "put to death the deeds of the flesh" (Rom. 8:13), the bishop, too, admonishes the ordinands to "mortify in your members all sin and concupiscence." Both priest and layman must mortify or put to death sensual inclinations, not merely resist them. "Kill" or "put to death" is meant literally, not figuratively; for we try to put to death real tendencies embedded in our nature. We strive to come as close as possible to the original state of integrity of Adam and Eve.

Notwithstanding the belief of Protestants, we can mortify sin and concupiscence because 1) we have the weapons (asceticism, prayer, mortification, sacraments), and 2) concupiscence is not irresistible. The Council of Trent taught that concupiscence is not identical to original sin. Baptism remits the guilt of original sin, but concupiscence remains in man "to provide a trial." Through the grace of Jesus Christ it is possible to resist concupiscence. All who resist and persevere "will be crowned." Moreover, Trent affirmed that St. Paul calls concupiscence sin not because it is truly sin, but because "it is from sin and inclines to sin" (Denz. 792; cited in The Church Teaches, p. 160.)

The practice of asceticism has always been encouraged in Catholicism. Earthly goods are to be used only as a means of facilitating union with God, our ultimate end. All that impedes this union is to be renounced. In such instances the words of Christ apply, "So if thy right eye is an occasion of sin to thee, pluck it out and cast it from thee . . ." (Matt. 5:29). Similarly, Our Lord warns, "Watch and pray, that you may not enter into temptation. The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak" (Matt. 26: 41). Following his Master, St. Paul preached renunciation of passions which can cause us to lose our "imperishable crown":

Obviously, the priest's vow of perpetual chastity has an ascetical purpose: the intentional training of the will; the practice of self-control. Chastity as an evangelical counsel is a special, unique call to perfection. While it is true that all are called to be perfect, the calling is acted out through the particular vocation which we have chosen. In other words, the end is the same (love of God), but the means are different (marital or single life, priest, or religious). Nonetheless, the priestly office is more suitable than marital life as a means of realizing the Christian ideal of perfection. This fact is rejected by those who protest against clerical celibacy.

Catholicism parts company from Protestantism on the question of perfection. For Protestants, there is no race for an everlasting victory or imperishable crown. To strive to be "perfect as our Heavenly Father is perfect" is a wasted effort; it is like "beating the air," to use St. Paul's words. Justification, once possessed, cannot be lost. Therefore Protestants have no reason to participate in the race. They have won the race without participating in it. According to Protestantism, God declares one victorious, so to speak, simply because he or she believes in the merits of His Son's redemptive activity. There is no race, no struggle, no battle, no need for perseverance, in order to be crowned. There is no victory, for there is no battle!

Just as St. Paul is acutely aware of how the power of sin focuses its attack on "the flesh" to "bring forth fruit unto death" (Rom. 7:5), so he preaches that it is better to remain celibate to live a holier life. After pointing out the marital right of husband and wife, St. Paul concludes: "But this I say by way of concession, not by way of commandment. For I would that you all were as I am myself; but each one has his own gift from God, one in this way, and another in that" (I Cor. 7:7-8). These words, together with those of I Cor. 7:32-35, manifest St. Paul's preference for celibacy.

These passages are important because as mentioned earlier the Protestant creeds quote St. Paul's words in I Tim. 3:2, I Tim. 3:12, and Titus 1:6, that a bishop or deacon "should have but one wife" as proof of his support of a married clergy. However, St. Paul is not issuing a command, or even a recommendation. St. Paul prefers his ministers to remain celibate; but if they be married, they should have been married but once. That is to say, they should exemplify the Christian attitude of remaining faithful to their respective wives and not seek divorce nor remarriage after the death of the first wife.

Some of the Protestant creeds quote St. Paul's words in I Cor. 7:9 as more proof that he favors a married clergy. I Cor. 7:9 reads: "But if they do not have self-control, let them marry, for it is better to marry than to burn." But the reference is erroneous in two ways. First, "burn" is translated as "aflame with passion" in The Augsburg Confession. The Second Helvetic Confession translates "burn" simply as "aflame," but in the sense of aflame with passion. However, St. Paul is not referring to the flames of passion; but to the flames of hell! Secondly, St. Paul is not sanctioning the marriage of priests. Rather, his admonition is directed to priests, too: Just as an unmarried person should marry if he or she has no self-control, so should a would-be priest. If a would-be priest has a "continual burning," as The Second Helvetic Confession puts it, he should marry lest he burn in hell. Only if the continual burning is one of love of God should he then think about a vocation.

The Protestant creeds mention only the marital act as an aid against concupiscence. St. Paul, of course, believes Christians have many weapons against concupiscence: "For though we walk in the flesh, we do not make war according to the flesh, for the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but powerful before God to the demolishing of strongholds . . ." (II Cor. 10:3). Although we walk in the flesh, we must live according to the Spirit. As weapons against concupiscence priests have the whole sacramental system of the Church, prayer, asceticism, mortification, and the Divine Office. Since Protestants believe these are not weapons at all, their only recourse is marriage.

This is not to say Catholics despise marriage! The Augsburg Confession, for example, states that "marriage should be held in honor" and, as pointed out before, refers to St. Paul as calling "the teaching that forbids marriage a doctrine of the devil," as if Catholic doctrine does not esteem marriage. That Christ raised marriage to the level of a sacrament is a tenet of the Catholic faith. Priests do not renounce marriage as if it is a virtue to do so. Nor is it a case of renunciation for its own sake. Rather, the end of renunciation is always love: self-surrender to God. The priest renounces marriage to devote himself "to the things of the Lord . . . to be holy in body and spirit" (I Cor. 7: 32-34).

This Pauline idea is akin to the concept of the mystical marriage between Christ and His Church. The intimate relation between Christ and His Mystical Body is often compared to the union of husband and wife (Matt. 9:15; 25: Iff; John 3:29; Eph. 5:22ff; Apoc. 21: 2,9). Is it not fitting, therefore, that this Church, a virgin Church, a Mystical Bride, should have a virgin priesthood?

The seeds for a virgin priesthood were planted as early as the Council of Elvira in 306. All bishops, deacons, and priests who were married were commanded to abstain from the marital act. In 325, the Council of Nicaea prohibited marriage after the reception of Holy Orders. It was not until 386, at a council headed by Pope Siricius, that all clerics were enjoined to practice continence. The Second Lateran Council (1139) declared that the marriages of clerics after their ordinations were not only unlawful but invalid. While reaffirming the position of Lateran II, the Council of Trent rejected the view that marriage and the sacerdotal office were incompatible by divine law. Vatican II extolled the practice of celibacy in Presbyterorum Ordinis (16) and stressed that students should be carefully and properly trained for this state in Optatam Totius.

If the law of clerical celibacy is abrogated in the Catholic Church, the priest will be seen as the father of a family and not as the father of souls. As are all shifts to Protestantism, the abolition of celibacy would be a degradation of the priestly office—and still another victory for the Church's enemies in the post-Vatican II period.