End Clerical Celibacy Now! - Part One

885 years ago the Catholic Church at the Second Lateran Council enforced a disciplinary rule that ultimately put a stop to clerics being married, In the Year of Our Lord 1139. For those who might want a reference, the following Canons are from the Council.

Canon VI (6): “We also decree that those in the orders of subdeacon and above who have taken wives or concubines are to be deprived of their position and ecclesiastical benefice. For since they ought to be in fact and in name temples of God, vessels of the Lord and sanctuaries of the holy Spirit, it is unbecoming that they give themselves up to marriage and impurity.”

Canon VII (7): “Adhering to the path trod by our predecessors, the Roman pontiffs Gregory VII, Urban and Paschal, we prescribe that nobody is to hear the masses of those whom he knows to have wives or concubines. Indeed, that the law of continence and the purity pleasing to God might be propagated among ecclesiastical persons and those in holy orders, we decree that where bishops, priests, deacons, subdeacons, canons regular, monks and professed lay brothers have presumed to take wives and so transgress this holy precept, they are to be separated from their partners. For we do not deem there to be a marriage which, it is agreed, has been contracted against ecclesiastical law. Furthermore, when they have separated from each other, let them do a penance commensurate with such outrageous behaviour.”

Now first and foremost, I want to say that it is deplorable that priests had concubines. However, having wives isn’t deplorable. In fact, it is a biblical command that we see in the letters in which St. Paul writes himself, especially to St. Timothy who was bishop of Ephesus. Now, St. Timothy wasn’t married, but nevertheless, he was free to have been according to St. Paul. 

The most common biblical defense for clerical celibacy is also from the same man who said that bishops/priests could marry comes from his First Letter to the Corinthians, “But I say to the unmarried, and to the widows: it is good for them if they so continue, even as I. But if they do not contain themselves, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to be burnt” (1 Corinthians 7:8-9). We must acknowledge that these verses don’t defend clerical celibacy. St. Paul even says that this isn’t based upon a command from God, but his own personal beliefs. He even says that those who burn should be married. He doesn’t say they must pick between marriage and the priesthood. 

Now back to the Canons themselves from the Council, Canon 6 makes a claim that is utterly terrifying, saying that priests must be deprived of their offices simply because they are married and since they are in the person of Christ shouldn’t be married. But isn’t Christ a bride to one woman, namely the Church? He absolutely is! Didn’t Our God allow for marriage among the Levites and the Levitical priesthood? Most certainly. The Levite priesthood had to survive somehow. Our God doesn’t bar men from becoming priests merely because they are married. No, only men who are hungry with greed and power do this. Which the Pope and the bishops at the time of these canons were full of. They were tired of the property and money of priests going to the families instead of the Church. The priests acted as they should, while the bishops acted against Christ in this horrid endeavor. It’s a wonder why Eastern Catholics would ever want to be in communion with the Roman Church when the Roman Church still goes by these canons, which ultimately makes Eastern priests less because they are married. 

In Canon 7, it is understandable not to want monks, brothers, nuns, sisters, religious to be married. This is different from the marriage of the clergy. It is abhorrent that validly ordained clergy were basically to be kicked from the clergy if they wouldn’t separate from their wives. If they wouldn’t, then the faithful must not hear their Masses.

Now it is understandable these days to not have married bishops, however married priests should be acceptable. It is also understandable of the rule that if you choose not to get married before you are ordained or that your wife dies after ordination that you can’t remarry. However, in these former times, the Church was seen as incredibly harsh for doing this.

It wasn’t the first time, the Church at the First Lateran Council made it very clear, but not as clear as the Second Lateran Council that enforced with more harshness the First Lateran Council’s ruling. Therefore, in this argumentative writing, the Second Lateran Council has been the heavy hitting point.

At Lateran I in AD 1123 (901 years ago) it was declared in Canon 21, “We absolutely forbid priests, deacons, subdeacons and monks to have concubines or to contract marriages. We adjudge, as the sacred canons have laid down, that marriage contracts between such persons should be made void and the persons ought to undergo penance.”

Now again, CONCUBINES ARE BAD. Married priests who do validly are not. However, Lateran I made a fatal mistake, they judged that marriage contracts of priests between women should be made void. Lantern II made it to where they must do penance upon separation. The First and Second Lateran Council at best destroy the indissolubility of the sacrament of marriage by declaring that what God has joined together is wrong, it is void, and it is invalid. When all the evidence points to everything being valid. The Church does a great disservice to the sacrament of matrimony in these two councils, which overpowers Christ with the, I dare say, the idiotic judgment of men. 

We can see in these councils the horrid foundations laid for the making of clerical celibacy. As Patriarch Gregorios III Laham of the Melkite Greek Catholic Church once put it at a 2006 synod, “Celibacy has no theological foundation.”

We can see at the Council of Trullo (Quinisext Council, held by the Eastern Orthodox Church, AD 692 - 1,332 years ago) the following Canon of what was to be held by the Early Church in Canon VI (6), “Since it is declared in the apostolic canons that of those who are advanced to the clergy unmarried, only lectors and cantors are able to marry; we also, maintaining this, determine that henceforth it is in no ways lawful for any subdeacon, deacon or presbyter after his ordination to contract matrimony but if he shall have dared to do so, let him be deposed. And if any of those who enter the clergy, wishes to be joined to a wife in lawful marriage before he is ordained subdeacon, deacon, or presbyter, let it be done.”

The Church of antiquity maintained what was right and just on this matter. The Roman Church seems to have skewed from the path on this matter. 

In this argumentative article which challenges clerical celibacy, we examined Church councils. In the following articles on this topic, we will discuss practical concerns for these times. 

This is in no way to destroy or hurt the clergy, but to offer an argument against clerical celibacy. Let us not forget, married priests are just as important as celibate priests.