A while back, when I was still in seminary, I wrote a paper for a church history course entitled “Tracing the Development of Clerical Celibacy in the Roman (Western) Church up to the Reformation”. Dry title but it is what it is. Due to some nonsense going on on the Facebook page, here it is (fair warning, it’s nearly 4000 words):
Introduction
Around the year 300, the council of Elvyra inSpainannounced that all clergy in its jurisdiction should maintain continence whether these clergy were married or unmarried. This is the earliest pronouncement of its time, and led to others, even though the pronouncement was less than effective over the years. But how did this pronouncement come about? In the traditional Jewish community, the priests had every opportunity to marry. Even in the early Christian communities, we read of several places where apostles are married. This paper seeks to explore how the Catholic Church went from a position of clerical marriage to clerical celibacy and the reasons for it.
In this paper, I will begin in the Old Testament to look at the state of priests in the Jewish communities. Next, I turn to the New Testament and begin to look for anything referencing marriage and clergy in whatever form the clergy is referenced. Following that, I will look at arguments for marriage, and arguments against it from the early church fathers, focusing on Jerome, Augustine, and Clement of Alexandria. Then, I will look at modern perceptions of the practice of clerical celibacy.
While I strive for an objective view, I write from a Lutheran background in which clerical celibacy is not discussed in theory and discouraged in practice. My views on clerical celibacy, therefore, are colored by my upbringing, but should not affect the objectivity of this paper. Also, in the context of this paper, due to the gender exclusiveness of the Roman priesthood, all pronouns I am using are in the masculine and a spouse will be referred to as “wife”. I do not discount the possibility of ordained women in the early church, especially in light of Romans 16:7, in fact I would prefer it, but the focus of this paper is on the male priesthood in both Judaism and Roman Catholicism. A third important clarification is that all Scriptural references are found in the New International Version of the Bible.
Marriage and Celibacy in the Old Testament
While we have very little information on the first named priest of God in the Old Testament, Melchizedek, another early named priest, Jethro, can be assumed to have a wife. “Now a priest of Midian had seven daughters, and they came to draw water and fill the troughs to water their father’s flock. Moses agreed to stay with the man, who gave his daughter Zipporah to Moses in marriage” (Exodus 2:16, 21). While Jethro is, at this time, not a priest of God, he becomes one later when he hears of the events of the Exodus. Here also we see that Moses, while not a priest but a prophet of God, takes a wife and later she bears his children.
Later in the book of Exodus, during the consecration of Aaron and his sons to the priesthood, we see another implied reference to marriage. Given the emphasis on chastity in the Old Testament, it is safe to assume a person’s child is a product of a marriage—although there are notable exceptions. “Among ancient peoples celibacy, especially female celibacy or virginity, was give a sacral value but was not considered to be a way of life…But the state of virginity was not to be permanent; to be unmarried and childless was to be the object of shame. Marriage was considered honorable and compulsory for all” (Catholic Encyclopedia Vol. 3 322). Because of this expectation of marriage, as well as the reference to sons, it is safe to assume Aaron also was married.
In one of the lists of instructions for priests, God commands, “They must not marry women defiled by prostitution or divorced from their husbands, because priests are holy to their God. The woman he marries must be a virgin. He must not marry a widow, a divorced woman, or a woman defiled by prostitution, but only a virgin from his own people (Leviticus 21:7, 13). Again, here we see the emphasis on female virginity, as well as details on whom a priest is to marry.
As the Old Testament goes on, there is reference upon reference to the sons of priest. Aaron’s son Eleazar has a son Phineas who, through a defense of God’s commands, God blessed with a lasting priesthood for him and his descendants (Numbers 25:13). The book of Joshua, as well as many other places in the Old Testament, references several times the descendants of Aaron the priest, and other priests. Thus, I am confident in saying that it was normative of priests in the Old Testament Jewish communities to be married. However, I must point of briefly a notable exception to the Jewish marriage in the sect of the Essenes. This culture held celibacy as a higher state than marriage, similar to the Jewish Monasticism prevalent later.
Marriage and Celibacy in the New Testament
This section, I seek to examine teachings on marriage within the New Testament, starting with the gospels, and moving into the epistles. Luke 1 shows us that the practice of marriage clergy continues for the Jews, as Zechariah’s wife Elizabeth. The brunt of Jesus’ marriage-related teaching is regarding divorce. However, he often alludes to Genesis 2:24 to uphold the condition of marriage. Yet, Christ teaches that a believer should love Him more than he loves his wife. Again, this is not a condemnation of marriage, only a statement of what a proper relationship with Jesus looks like.
Where Jesus does not speak much about marriage as an institution, Paul has much to speak about. He hold marriage as a state below celibacy—asserting in his letter to the Corinthians, “It is good for a man not to marry” (1 Corinthians 7:1). However, shortly thereafter he includes this teaching:
Since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband. The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. The wife’s body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband’s body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife. Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. I say this as a concession, not as a command. (1 Corinthians 7:2-6)
Paul grants, because of the immorality of the time, that men should take a wife to stave off temptation. Among the married, Paul encourages people to practice celibacy for a time as a kind of fast, but only if it is a mutual decision. He also guides them not to remain celibate on a permanent basis. This statement is important for a later argument.
Despite this concession of marriage, Paul still argues for a celibate state. “Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I am. But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion” (1 Corinthians 7:8-9). He restates this argument three more times:
Now about virgins: I have no command from the Lord, but I give a judgment as one who by the Lord’s mercy is trustworthy. Because of the present crisis, I think that it is good for you to remain as you are. But if you do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. But those who marry will face many troubles in this life, and I want to spare you this. (1 Corinthians 7:25-26, 28)
Also,
An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord’s affairs—how he can please the Lord. But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world—how he can please his wife— and his interests are divided. An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord’s affairs: Her aim is to be devoted to the Lord in both body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world—how she can please her husband. I am saying this for your own good, not to restrict you, but that you may live in a right way in undivided devotion to the Lord. (1 Corinthians 7:32-35)
And most strongly,
If anyone thinks he is acting improperly toward the virgin he is engaged to, and if she is getting along in years and he feels he ought to marry, he should do as he wants. He is not sinning. They should get married. But the man who has settled the matter in his own mind, who is under no compulsion but has control over his own will, and who has made up his mind not to marry the virgin—this man also does the right thing. So then, he who marries the virgin does right, but he who does not marry her does even better. (1 Corinthians 7:36-38)
It is obvious in these passages that Paul holds celibacy to be a higher state than marriage, especially in light of this teaching. Paul expresses this view as a way of growing closer to God and not being focused on the things of the world, such as a husband or wife. He does not specify this for clergy specifically, but to a church with a certain situation in the city ofCorinth. However, he does admit in 1 Corinthians 7:7 that not all people are given the gift of celibacy, though he does wish that it was that way.
Later in 1 Corinthians, Paul talks about the rights of an apostle. In this discussion, he says, “Don’t we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord’s brothers and [Peter]? Or is it only I and Barnabas who must work for a living?” (1 Corinthians 9:5-6). Here we have a reference to the apostles being married, and stating that the apostle has every right to have a wife who is a believer. However, the context also leaves the freedom to choose a celibate lifestyle based on the same argument.
Paul’s pastoral epistles also speak of marriage, and this time he specifically references the clergy. 1 Timothy and Titus contain instructions for the clergy that he should be “the husband of but one wife and must manage his children and his household well” (1 Timothy 3:12). Now, the interpretation here could be that the clergyman should have one wife, or should have only one wife. Based on other texts, such as the 1 Corinthians 7 text, I believe the argument Paul makes is for the clergyman to have no more than one wife, leaving his options to be one wife or no wife.
Later in 1 Timothy, Paul cautions his young charge to be wary of those people who forbid marriage (1 Timothy 4:3). Again, his consistent theme of freedom in Christ comes into play here. Even while he encourages celibacy in the other letters, he will not take the step to command it; he also refuses to accept, to the point of forbidding others to accept, the teachings of anyone who does vilify marriage to the point of forbidding the act.
In the same epistle to Timothy, Paul again counsels those who are not married to marry as a way to avoid sinfulness.
As for younger widows…when their sensual desires overcome their dedication to Christ, they want to marry. Thus they bring judgment on themselves, because they have broken their first pledge. Besides, they get into the habit of being idle and going about from house to house. And not only do they become idlers, but also gossips and busybodies, saying things they ought not to. So I counsel younger widows to marry, to have children, to manage their homes and to give the enemy no opportunity for slander. Some have in fact already turned away to follow Satan. (1 Timothy 5:11-15)
Yet again, I sense the undertone of reluctant disappointment that certain widows cannot maintain a celibate lifestyle. However, he cares more for the good of the person’s soul than for his commitment to encouraging celibacy. He allows for the freedom in Christ to marry or not to marry.
As we can see, the New Testament, especially Paul, seems to encourage celibacy as a higher state from marriage, yet marriage is still a sinless alternative as a practice unto itself. Marriage is seen as a way to avoid falling into sinful lusts of the flesh. However, Paul allows the clergy the Christian freedom to marry, as seen in the Pastoral Epistles. Thus, my reading of the New Testament alone shows a clergy who is equally allowed to marry or to be celibate.
Marriage and Celibacy for the Early Fathers
After looking at the Biblical references to clerical celibacy and marriage, I now move on to the early Fathers and councils of the church after the apostolic age. Clement ofAlexandria, Jerome, Augustine, and others all have one thing or another to say about marriage in general which can be extracted to the specific of the clergy. This section is devoted to their writings both for and against clerical celibacy.
General Arguments
While perhaps much of the early church’s clergy was indeed unmarried, there was great emphasis in the writings of the church that allowed clergyman the choice of celibacy or marriage. Indeed, the Synod of Gangra condemned those persons who refused to attend ‘masses’ held by married priests (Catholic Encyclopedia Vol 3 323). Similarly, “The Apostolic Constitutions excommunicated a priest or bishop who left his wife ‘under pretense of piety’ (Scororum Conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio 1.51)” (ibid). Others, such as Socrates, Sozomen, and Gelasius of Cyzicus assert:
…that new tendencies at the beginning of the 4th Century had tried to prohibit clerical marriage, but until that time individual choice had been the rule. They reveal that when Bishop Hosius of Córdoba sought to have the First Council of Nicea pass a decree requiring celibacy, the Egyptian Bishop Paphnutius, himself unmarried, protested that such a rule would be difficult and imprudent. He further emphasized that celibacy should be a matter of vocation and personal choice. The Council accepted this point of view. (ibid)
Despite this decision in Nicea, many others still argued for mandatory clerical celibacy. Arguments coming from Jerome and others spoke to the higher state of celibacy as the preferred state for the clergy. Before the full declaration of celibacy, several conditions arose. If a person was married before ordination, they could remain married. If someone broke the law of chastity before ordination, they could not marry as a priest. One who has been married twice could not be clergy. These were the conditions surrounding the early church. (Catholic Encyclopedia Vol 3 323-324)
Clement of Alexandria
In his Stromata, Clement of Alexandria includes a treatise on Book III entitled “On Marriage”. This text carries with it several themes of marriage, including legitimizing it for the apostles, and therefore clergy.
“[In ancient times] some begat children and lived chastely in the married state…But whereas they say that they are superior to them in behaviour [sic] and conduct, they cannot even be compared with them in their deeds. “He who does not eat,” then, “let him not despise him who eats; and he who eats let him not judge him who does not eat; for God has accepted him.” Or do they also scorn the apostles? Peter and Philip had children, and Philip gave his daughters in marriage. (Clement ofAlexandria52)
However, Clement also argues in his next section that Paul took a consort, something that many scholars would quickly disagree with based on the sum of Paul’s writings. He later states, “whether we are continent or married is a matter for our free choice and that there is no absolute prohibition which would impose continence upon us as a necessity” (ibid. 66). In the next section, he argues that marriage is not a sin in principle, and a man should marry even if he does not want children. Also, he states clearly, “what he wants to do is not harmful if it is done with self-control” (ibid 67) referencing marriage.
Augustine
While appreciating the importance and value of the marriage relationship, it seems Augustine sets celibacy above marriage. He allows that when deciding between the two options, “the one who has the great good than the other is better” (Augustine 54). However, he still sets marriage up as inferior in general. Mary is the example he uses to advocate virginity as a superior state. Virgins also have the better opportunity to follow Christ’s leading.
Press on, therefore, you saints of God, boys and girls, men and women, celibates and virgins; press on steadfastly to the end. Praise God more pleasingly because you think of him more frequently. Hope in him more gladly, because you serve him more earnestly. Love him more ardently, because you serve his pleasure more attentively…Where do you think this Lamb goes, where no one but you dares, or is able, to follow him?…To the place, I believe, where the pasture is joy…Rightly you follow him by virginity in body and heart, wherever he goes. (idib 85)
One can see here that Augustine holds the celibate view higher than marriage, even if he does not decry marriage. The idea he expresses is not that marriage in inferior, but that celibacy is the better of two good things. This view of celibacy continues to hold today, especially in Roman Catholic teaching on vocations and choosing celibacy or marriage.
Jerome
On of the most influential documents on this topic is Jerome’s Against Jovinianus. Here he refutes a heretic of the early church, one of whose precepts is that marriage is of no great value than celibacy. He quotes Paul as the key to raising celibacy up to that position.
The reason why it is better to marry is that it is worse to burn. Let burning lust be absent, and he will not say it is better to marry. The word better always implies a comparison with something worse, not a thing absolutely good and incapable of comparison…If marriage in itself be good, do not compare it with fire, but simply say ‘It is good to marry/’ I suspect the goodness of that thing which is forced into the position of being only the lesser of two evils. What I want is not a smaller evil, but a thing absolutely good. (Jerome 352)
Jerome also takes the Virgin Mary as the example of chastity, even while Christ is also included. He quotes both Old and New Testament examples of the values of marriage and celibacy, and how all of Scripture extols celibacy. As an example of his argument, I include here his discussion of Ezekiel.
Ezekiel, who was kept captice in Babylong, who saw the storm approaching from the north, and the whirlwind seeping all before it, says, “My wife died in the evening and I did in the morning as I was commanded.” For the Lord had previously told him that in the day he should open his mouth, and speak, and no longer keep silence. Mark well, that while his wife was living he was not at liberty to admonish the people. His wife died, the bond of wedlock as broken, and without the least hesitation he constantly devoted himself to the prophetic office. For he who was called being free, is truly the Lord’s bondservant. (ibid 371)
He concludes his argument by quoting secular scholars, a solution I find questionable. However, he accomplishes his purposes and argues his point extensively.
Later Legislation Regarding Clerical Celibacy
After the declaration of the Council of Elvyra mentioned earlier, in the late fourth century, Pope Siricius made a declaration enforcing clerical celibacy as a superior state to marriage, in refutation of the same Jovinian Jerome refuted. By the end of Leo I’s reign as Pope, all clergy had to be celibate. In the ninth and tenth centuries, a monastic community atClunybegan to institute several reforms. One of these reforms is the return to the ideal of monastic celibacy, a return leading also to an increase in true clerical celibacy. This grew out of a commitment to the Benedictine Rule.
The bitter end of any clerical marriage took place in and around the reforms of Gregory VII. Due to the machinations of previous popes, clergy participated in the same excesses of their superiors. However, the Second Lateran Council decreed that all clergy must take vows of celibacy. This did not completely eliminate the issue, as even until the reformation many priests still took wives, even if in secret.
A Modern Backwards Look
Uta Ranke-Heinemann writes that celibacy has a pagan root. She claims “pagan priests castrated themselves so that they would not be stained by sex, but be pure and holy mediators between people and the god or goddess” (Ranke-Heinemann 99). Ms. Ranke-Heinemann has a vicious streak about her towards the Roman church, as well as a bitterness against celibacy in general, but her argument presents a different picture of the reasons for it. By quoting ancient Greek authors, she shows a pagan background of celibacy and of a rejection of marriage. She says,
It was against this background of hostility to sex and marriage on the pat of leading theologian and, in particular, the popes that compulsory celibacy, as we now know it, was foisted upon the Catholic priesthood. The beginnings of the celibate attack on the body can be found as early as the first centuries of our ear, but this development was not fixed in law until late in that day, and then in two stages: first in 1139 when Pope Innocent II declared clerical ordination a diriment impediment. That mean marriage and ordination were mutually exclusive…Thus after 1139 it was impossible for priests to marry…After the age when priests were allowed to marry came the age of clandestine and persecuted priestly marriages. (ibid 100)
She strings together several more councils of the church, starting with Elvyra. Finally, she presents some opposing arguments, without mentioning any positives. Finally she ends with a refutation of the practice of celibacy, saying it is a dead practice and should be lifted immediately.
Conclusions
The evolution of clerical celibacy flows out of a desire to become more like Christ and to follow in his footsteps. However this dogma of the Catholic church found its end not as a chosen discipline in the form of a fast, but instead as a required step for those who have the calling to the priesthood. The passion of the early fathers who pioneered these thoughts should be noted, however, much of it stems from an overanalyzing of the texts of Scripture, and a blatant ignorance of others. It is my belief, reinforced by my study in this paper, that celibacy should be a call like any other, and not one forced upon someone solely because they have a certain other call.
References
Augustine. 1999. Marriage and Virginity. Hyde Park,NY:New City Press.
Carson, Thomas, et al. 2003. The New Catholic Encyclopedia.Farmington Hills,MI: The Gale Group.
Cruse, C. F., tr. 2000. Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History. Peabody,MA: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc.
de Vaux, Roland. 1961. Ancient Israel. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc.
Osborne, Kenan B. 1988. Priesthood. New York: Paulist Press.
Ranke-Heinemann, Uta. 1990. Eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven. New York: Doubleday.
Schaff, Philip, et al. 2004. Jerome: Letters and Select Works. Peabody,MA: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc.
Walker, Williston, et al. 1985. A History of the Christian Church. New York: Scribner.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluniac_Reforms. Cluniac Reforms – Wikipedia.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/clement-stromata-book3-english.html. Clement’s Stromata, Book III, in English.