Fr. Roger J. Landry
The Landing
Editorial
The Anchor
November 18, 2005
Proposition 11 of the recently concluded Synod of Bishops on the Eucharist requested that “the reasons for the relationship between celibacy and priestly ordination be properly explained to the faithful, in full respect of the tradition of the Eastern Churches.”
In the past two editorials, we discussed why there is a need for such an explanation and gave the history of priestly celibacy in the early Church and in the West. Now we turn to the practice and understanding of married clergy in the Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Catholic Churches such as the Maronite, Melchite, Ukranian and Ruthenian.
It is often said that the present practice in the Eastern Churches is more ancient than the practice of strict priestly celibacy in the West, but this is misleading. The most ancient practice in the Church, as we discussed last week, allowed married men to be ordained; after ordination, however, these married priests needed to live by a “law of continence,” abstaining from conjugal relations. The uniformity of this practice in both East and West was seen at first ecumenical council, held in Nicaea in 325, which decreed what seemed to be a long-standing prudential practice: that, lest their be any temptation or cause for scandal, no woman could live in the home of a bishop, priest or deacon except for the cleric’s mother, sister, or aunt.
There were, unsurprisingly, cases in East and West of priests who failed in the practice of the lex continentiae, but the principle remained the same until the end of the seventh century, when many Eastern Churches, against the objections of the Church of Rome, broke from the common discipline. At the Council of Trullo in 691, the Eastern bishops, while maintaining the traditional practice of perfect continence for bishops and the impossibility of a priest to remarry after his wife’s death, decreed that priests and deacons only needed to maintain a temporary continence — originally one day but later expanded to three — before the celebration of the Divine Liturgy. The ascetical practice of temporary abstinence from the good of conjugal relations for the sake of a greater love and self-giving in the Eucharist was akin to a pre-Eucharistic fast from food so that one might hunger more for the Bread of Life. Nevertheless, temporary continence did lead to a practical problem over time: a serious lack of availability with regard to daily Mass.
By the twelfth century, because of widespread abuses among unmarried clergy, who were living with concubines and attempting illegal marriages, many Eastern churches made marriage prior to ordination compulsory for secular clergy. A celibate who wished to be ordained, or a widowed priest who wanted to continue his ministry, needed to enter a monastery. Eventually tensions and problems developed in many places due to the two different priestly “castes,” married and unmarried. Other problems ensued as well. Because the sons of the secular clergy were expected to follow their dads into the priestly state, a de-emphasis of the supernatural aspect of the priestly vocation arose in favor of a natural birthright.
The present situation — although it varies somewhat among the numerous eastern Churches, Orthodox and Catholic — maintains many of these historical elements. Bishops and monks are celibate. Married men can be ordained, but ordained men cannot marry. The law of temporary continence, while still an esteemed practice, is no longer an ascetical requirement.
While some forces in the West look toward the East and the ordination of married men as a solution to a crisis in priestly vocations, many in the East note that a married priesthood creates special difficulties. Cardinal Nasrallah Sfeir, the Maronite Patriarch of Antioch, said in his Synod intervention: “The marriage of priests, even if resolving one problem, also creates other serious problems” which he then went on to describe. Married clergy need to earn sufficient money to take care of his wife and children; when parishes cannot supply an adequate salary, they often must work other jobs to make ends meet. He noted that it is often difficult if not impossible to transfer priests, because it means dislocating an entire family. A priest’s obligations to his family, he simply put, often compete with his commitments to his parish.
Cardinal Sfeir concluded his intervention by urging Roman Catholics not to take celibacy for granted. As one thoroughly immersed “in the tradition of the eastern Churches,” he said he has learned a particular appreciation for “the relationship between celibacy and priestly ordination.”
Although celibacy is undervalued in the “eroticism” of modern culture, he stated categorically that it is “the most precious gem in the treasure of the Catholic Church.”