Is Priestly Celibacy entirely and solely of Discipline?

Celibacy is required of Bishops in the Eastern Rites and the Latin Rite (Presbyterorum Ordinis, n. 16) and is generally required of priests in the Latin Rite. In the East, some married men are ordained as priests, just as in the West some married men are ordained as permanent deacons. Some exception is made in the Latin Rite for married men to become priests, for example, when a married Anglican priest and his congregation converts to the Catholic Faith, he is often permitted to remain married AND receive Holy Orders to the sacerdotal degree. However, the Church does not permit an ordained priest, nor even (in most cases) an ordained permanent deacon, even in the Eastern Churches, to seek marriage subsequent to receiving Holy Orders. One may sometimes leave a lower calling for a higher calling, but one should not leave a higher calling for a lesser calling.

Now as Second Vatican Council taught, celibacy “is not demanded by the very nature of the priesthood” (Presbyterorum Ordinis, n. 16). However, this does not imply that the connection between celibacy and the priesthood is entirely and solely of discipline. Certainly, there is an aspect to priestly celibacy that falls under the disciplines of the Church, in that the Church governs the requirement for celibacy and its exceptions. Celibacy is not absolutely required by the nature of the priesthood in each and every case. But neither is celibacy exterior to the nature of the priesthood as a whole.

All Seven Sacraments are necessary for the Church to bring salvation to the world. But all Seven Sacraments need not be received by each and every person who is saved. The Church cannot dismiss any of the Sacraments from Her work, even though not every person need receive every Sacrament. The Church cannot dismiss celibacy from the priesthood, even though not every priest need be celibate.

The intimate connection between celibacy and the priesthood is a doctrine of the Church. The Church teaches that:
* Jesus was unmarried;
* the priest represents Christ;
* there is no marriage in Heaven, since death ends the marital bond;
* there is no marriage after the Resurrection;
* virginity and celibacy are better than marriage;
* celibacy is particularly fitting for the priesthood.

These teachings necessarily imply a further teaching, that the Church lacks the authority to choose a priesthood that is entirely or mainly composed of married men.

Christ established the priesthood. He did not establish a married priesthood, but a priesthood that is primarily unmarried, with some exceptions permitted. This truth is evident from Sacred Tradition. The priesthood has always consisted primarily of celibate men. The ordained priesthood was established by Christ and is a continuation of His Ministry and salvific work. Jesus was a virgin, and he was celibate. He chose to remain unmarried for his entire life on earth.

His virgin bride is the Church, and so he did not take a wife. The priest represents Christ to the members of the Church, but the priest also represents the Church to Christ. So for both reasons, celibacy is inherent to the priesthood, even though it not absolutely required in every case. Since celibacy is better than marriage, and since the priests represent Christ who is perfect, it is inherent to the nature of the priesthood that most priests be celibate.

Jesus also taught that there is no marriage after the general Resurrection: “those who shall be held worthy of that age, and of the resurrection from the dead, will neither be married, nor take wives.” (Lk 20:35). Marriage is a temporal good; it is not the type of good that persists unto eternity. But the priesthood is primarily concerned with spiritual goods that persist unto eternity. Marriage certainly has spiritual benefits, but the Council of Trent infallibly taught that celibacy and virginity are better than marriage.

CANON IX. If anyone says that clerics constituted in sacred orders, or Regulars, who have solemnly professed chastity, are able to contract marriage, and that being contracted it is valid, notwithstanding the ecclesiastical law, or vow; and that the contrary is nothing else than to condemn marriage; and, that all who do not feel that they have the gift of chastity, even though they have made a vow thereof, may contract marriage; let him be anathema: seeing that God refuses not that gift to those who ask for it rightly, neither does He suffer us to be tempted above that which we are able.

CANON X. If anyone says, that the marriage state is to be placed above the state of virginity, or of celibacy, and that it is not better and more blessed to remain in virginity, or in celibacy, than to be united in matrimony; let him be anathema.

If the Church were to require or permit all or most priests to be married, She would be contradicting in deed the above infallible teaching of the Council of Trent. The Church lacks the authority to do so.

The New Covenant is greater than the Old Covenant. The Old Covenant had a priesthood that consisted mainly of married men. The New Covenant has an ordained priesthood, making the new priesthood greater than the old. However, in so far as this priesthood is greater by nature than the old, it must also be greater as concerns marriage and celibacy. Since celibacy is greater than marriage, the priesthood of the New Covenant must consist mainly of the celibate, not mainly of the married.

Therefore, the Church lacks the authority to cause or to permit all or most priests to be married.

Moreover, the Virgin Mary was ever-virgin, even though it was God’s will for her to be married and bear a child. Therefore, celibacy and virginity are better than marriage, and those who choose the better portion — a life of religious consecration — must also be celibate.

[Luke]
{10:41} And the Lord responded by saying to her: “Martha, Martha, you are anxious and troubled over many things.
{10:42} And yet only one thing is necessary. Mary has chosen the best portion, and it shall not be taken away from her.”

by
Ronald L. Conte Jr.
Roman Catholic theologian and
translator of the Catholic Public Domain Version of the Bible.

This entry was posted in discipline, doctrine. Bookmark the permalink.