A Conversation on
Celibacy
Recently a prominent Vatican official stated that the issue
of clerical celibacy is not a doctrinal issue, but one of discipline. Consequently, people in the Church can have
legitimate conversations about celibacy that is aimed at the true benefit of
Mother Church. Needless to say, whenever
the topic arises there is little benefit to be derived from the discussion
since the loud voices with agendae come forward to do battle with one another. Rather than give those camps more
consideration than they deserve, what follows is instead a series of discussion
points around which a more healthy conversation on the topic of clerical
celibacy can hopefully take place.
I.
Theological
Considerations
Since the topic by definition is not dogmatic, any
theological musings are merely pastoral in nature. Indeed, this pastoral approach is exactly
what is contained within the New Testament in the two places where celibacy
arises.
In 1 Corinthians 7: 25-40 Paul provides some advice to
people of his time as to whether they should marry or not. A careful reading of the text provides us
with two important things to note.
First, Paul makes clear that there is no command from the Lord on this
topic; therefore, the advice that follows is merely that – advice. It is neither prescriptive nor imperative in
nature. The second feature is the
context in which Paul frames the conversation.
He states quite clearly that his advice is based on the fact that there
is little time and that people should be making ready for the coming of the
Lord Jesus. Needless to say, the
imminent coming of Jesus did not take place, and so the context of Paul’s
instruction is no longer a pressing concern for the Church in subsequent
ages.
Paul was quite right that Jesus did not make a directive in
the matter of celibacy, for the only time He makes reference to the issue at
all is in Matthew 19: 10-12. Again,
there are two important things to note that are identical to those found in I
Cor. 7: 25-40. First, Jesus gives no
command to the entire Church that all should be celibate. In fact, Jesus points out that there are many
forms of celibacy to be found: the
person born without the capacity to procreate; the person made so by others
through physical operation; and those who choose to do so for the sake of the Kingdom
of God. This latter group may have been
a reference to the Nazirites of old, and it may also refer to some Essene
communities where celibacy was practiced by some. In any case, there is again no command to
impose the discipline on everyone.
In addition, this passage is within the context of an
earlier teaching about divorce, after which the disciples asked if it were
better to marry. As St. Augustine was to
note in his time, the call to virginity is a higher calling than marriage, but
it is precisely that – a calling that one freely decides to embrace for the
sake of the Kingdom of God.
It should be noted that if the Church were no longer to
mandate celibacy for priests and religious this decision would in no way
contradict the idea that virginity is a higher calling than marriage. A person who is called to orders or religious
life still can freely choose to remain celibate or not. The Augustinian principle would still be
honored and maintained.
However, another theological consideration is often
overlooked. Canon Law and the Catechism of
the Catholic Church teach that the lay faithful have a right to the
sacraments. People must have a right to
access to the sacramental life of the Church.
In many places people do not have such access, or their access is
limited. If celibacy were optional,
would this mean that the Church would have more priests to provide the
sacraments to the faithful? This is an
open question, but one to which we will return later in this essay.
II.
Celibacy
Today
Most Catholics today are unaware of the fact that the
Western Church already has married clergy in her midst, and that optional
celibacy exists within a certain part of the ordained priesthood.
Shortly after World War II Pope Pius XII created a provision
whereby Lutheran clergy who desired full communion with the Catholic Church
could become ordained as Roman Catholic priests. This provision was largely unnoticed in the
larger Church as it applied to limited numbers of men in Germany and Scandinavian
countries. Blessed Pope John Paul II
would use this example when he created a similar process for American clergy
from the Episcopalian and Anglican traditions to become Roman Catholic priests
upon their full reception into the Church.
And most recently, Pope Benedict XVI expanded this provision in creating
Anglican ordinariates in various parts of the world to facilitate full
communion to the Church for lay people and clergy from the Anglican
tradition. Hundreds of men have become
Roman Catholic priests and are married men.
The presence of these married priests has enriched the
Church in many ways, the most important of which is the fact that more people
have access to the sacraments than previously.
Imagine the pastoral challenge in providing priests in many communities
if these men were not functioning faithfully as Roman Catholic priests. In our own diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph
three parishes are staffed by married priests from other traditions. To provide a priest for those parishes without
these men would be a real burden and likely would result in decreased access to
sacramental life for large numbers of people.
However, since the Second Vatican Council another group of
men in the Church have been living sacred orders while also being married –
permanent deacons. Here again, celibacy
is optional and a great many of our permanent deacons are married men who are
ordained to the diaconal form of holy orders.
Permanent deacons provide the Church with yet another opportunity for
sacramental access by the faithful. The
experience of the last fifty years has shown how valuable the ministry of
permanent deacons is to the life of the Church.
We can also attest to how many men present themselves as candidates each
cycle.
The Church has a wealth of experience in having married
clergy serving the People of God. Should
the Church decide to make celibacy optional to the larger priesthood and
religious life, before doing so she would have ample data and lived experience
of married priests already present from which to draw.
One final and uncomfortable item should be mentioned in this
section on celibacy today, and that is the reality of celibate priests who are
not faithful to their commitment to their vows of celibacy. In itself this reality is not an argument for
or against changing the discipline of mandatory celibacy. This sadreality will exist whether a change
in discipline is made or not. However,
the scandal of these violations has cost the Church a great deal, and it
greatly harms the many priests who are faithful to their commitment.
III.
The
Cost
The final issue that has legitimately been raised is that of
cost. Simply put, it costs more money to
pay a married priest than a celibate priest.
Families need to be supported by these men, thereby requiring more
resources in which to do so. On one
level, this issue seems inappropriate:
if married priests are fulfilling an essential role in providing
sacraments to the faithful who are entitled to them, then how can we put a
monetary stipulation in considering the issue of priestly celibacy. On the other hand, the material world is a
consideration for us, as parishes must deal effectively with their budgets, and
the Church must be good stewards of the resources given to her by the People of
God.
First, it must be stressed that not all priests will be
married. Many will continue to choose
celibacy just as many do in the Orthodox traditions. Second, the Church has found creative ways to
adequately compensate those married priests we currently have in service. God will provide for His Church in this
matter as He does in so many other areas.
The issue of cost is never raised when it comes to priests
who violate celibacy, however. If a
priest fathers a child, for example, the Church has an obligation to provide
for the child. The priests who have
violated celibacy in notorious ways have cost the Church billions of dollars in
settlement monies, treatment facilities to rehabilitate wayward clerics, and
attorneys’ fees, not to mention the loss of faithful due to the scandals. Again, these violations are not arguments for
or against celibacy. It is, rather, a lesson
for the hierarchy that in her discipline of supporting celibacy that serious
action be taken against priests who are in violation of these vows. For too long there has existed a double
standard in upholding morality. A lay
employee who has a child out of wedlock or who is gay will be terminated
quickly. Priests who violate chastity
are given many chances and cost the Church plenty in treasure and loss of
reputation, though the greatest harm is often done to those who had voluntary
or involuntary acts against chastity with the priest.
Regardless of whether the
Church maintains mandatory celibacy or not, she must deal decisively with
priests and religious who violate the vow.
The integrity of the Church and the good of the priesthood is at stake
whenever we fail to take appropriate action when such violations occur.
Conclusion
A great theological issue is
at stake in this issue of priestly celibacy:
will the faithful have access to the sacramental life of the Church in
an adequate manner? This is the only
consideration, theologically, that matters.
It is a matter of prudential judgment as to whether optional celibacy
will help us achieve that theological mandate.
The Church has demonstrated that all other issues related to married
clergy can be addressed sufficiently, at least with respect to the numbers of
married priests currently in service.
Whether that can continue with a larger pool of married clergy is again
another prudential decision. We can only
pray for those tasked with leading this discussion and making the decisions
that they follow the promptings of the Holy Spirit wherever it leads us.
