Benedict Ashley, O.P., *Spiritual Direction in the Dominican Tradition* p. 50 claims: >Naturally speaking, the human species is divided equally into male and female, so that every human can find a partner and form a marriage, and if there had been no fall into sin, naturally all persons would have married. Is this true? Would've everyone married if there were no Original Sin? It seems not, as isn't celibacy equally natural as being married? What did Catholic fathers or doctors of the Church have to say about this?

In separate startling incidents, two Parish Priests of Roman Catholic Church of India reportedly gave up their life recently after having undergone treatment for psychological condition. In many parishes, the priests lead isolated life and are prone to suicidal tendency in case they have psychological disorder. Such incidences could have been avoided if the priests were withdrawn from the parish and kept in community life under observation. My question is: Has the Catholic Church issued any standing instructions to Bishops in order to stave off such unfortunate incidents?

"Some have argued that Augustine of Hippo never really shook himself entirely free from his Manichaean upbringing, with its intrinsic distaste for sexuality and understanding of eroticism as a work of shameful evil, and **that through him Manichaean tinges have survived in Western Christianity ever since.**" (John Anthony McGuckin. The Path of Christianity: The First Thousand Years ) I know that in the Roman Local Church, until about the 4th century, there was no mandatory practice of priestly celibacy: - George T. Dennis SJ, professor of Catholic University of America, says: "**There is simply no clear evidence of a general tradition or practice, much less of an obligation, of priestly celibacy-continence before the beginning of the fourth century.**" (Dennis, George T. SJ on Cochini, *The Apostolic Origins of Priestly Celibacy* (book review), *Theological Studies*, 52:4 (1991:Dec.) p.738) - Philippe Delhaye wrote: "**During the first three or four centuries, no law was promulgated prohibiting clerical marriage.** Celibacy was a matter of choice for bishops, priests, and deacons. [...] The apostolic constitutions (c. 400) excommunicated a priest or bishop who left his wife 'under pretense of piety' (*Sacrorum Conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio* 1:51)." (Philippe Delhaye, "Celibacy, Clerical, History of" in *New Catholic Encyclopedia* Vol. 3, Catholic University of America, p.370) - "Early heretics, such as Manichaeans and Montanists, added a negative influence by proclaiming that sexual expression – including that of the laity – was impure. Catholic leaders, such as St. Augustine, taught that Original Sin was transmitted through intercourse. Therefore, abstinence and virginity was the ideal life and only the weak should marry. However, most bishops and presbyters continued to marry. When monastic spirituality became popular in the fourth and fifth centuries, it promoted the ideal of celibacy as a model for all priests." (Dues, Greg (1992). *Catholic customs & traditions: a popular guide* (Rev. and expanded. ed.). Mystic, Conn.: Twenty-Third Publications. pp. 168, 169.) **Question**: Is there really any connection between Augustine's background as a Manichaean and his idea of priestly celibacy?

If a husband man loses his wife to death, is it possible for him to become a Catholic priest in the Latin Rite? What about any children of this marriage union? Can this man now become a priest in the Latin Rite and climb the priestly ladder (bishop, archbishop, ect)?

Is there an online edition or English translation of: - Hildebrand, Dietrich von. “Die Bedeutung von Mann und Frau füreinander ausserhalb der Ehe.” In *Zeitliches Im Lichte Des Ewigen *, 143–44. Regensburg, 1932. ? It was cited in *Pastoral Psychology in Practice* by Willibald Demal, OSB, ch. 8 "The Psychology of Celibacy" .

The Bible mentions that one of the miracles Jesus performed was the healing of Peter's mother-in-law. This makes it quite clear that Peter himself was married, and Peter is the considered the first Pope by Roman Catholics. I've also heard that many if not all of the first popes were married and had families. So, my question is this: When was it that marriage first became prohibited for priests and popes in the Catholic church (for Latin Rite priests)? > And immediately he left the synagogue and entered the house of > Simon and Andrew, with James and John. Now Simon’s mother-in-law lay > ill with a fever, and immediately they told him about her. Mark > 1:29-30 ESV

The Roman Catholic Church requires its priests to practice celibacy. This has not always been the case, though. In fact, it was not instituted until the 11th century. Protestant churches have no requirement of celibacy. So, what is the reason for this? Specifically why do Protestant churches, which began well after the practice had been instituted in the Catholic Church, do not require this of their pastors?

Catholics would say that Peter (by virtue of being first Pope) is a Bishop. How would such Catholics (though not all Catholics hold to this view) that say Priests must be unmarried and celibate respond to Matthew 8:14, which says that: >14 And when Jesus entered Peter's house, he saw his mother-in-law lying sick with a fever. (ESV) Note the use of "mother in-law". This implies that Peter was married. Again, how do they respond to this?

Do the Eastern Orthodox think the state of virginity is superior and more meritorious to the state of marriage? If so, what modern Eastern Orthodox theologians support this view? cf. Is virginity more meritorious than marriage, according to St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 7?

Catholics regard Peter as the first pope. In the gospel we learn that Peter's mother-in-law was healed, thus Peter was married. On the other hand, today the popes are never married and married men cannot be elected pope. I'm interested in the chronology of this change from the first married to the unmarried, celibate popes of today. 1. Who was the last pope we know of was married? 2. From what point in time on can we know for sure no pope was married anymore? Please note that between these two points in time there might be a substantial time span as a result of a lack of data or regulation. Please also note that I am not interested in the history or the general merits of priestly celibacy as a whole, I was able to research that elsewhere .

In the Catholic Church, priests are required to stay celibate. *(As far as I know, protestant priests that convert to Catholicism are allowed an exception -- they can become Catholic priests even if they already have family.)* I cannot understand how this fits with the Bible, as 1. Peter was married (Matthew 8:14 ), and he still was (according to Catholics) the first Pope. 2. According to Paul, *overseers* and *elders* must be "the husband of one wife" (1 Timothy 3:2 , Titus 1:5-6 ) 3. Paul even seems to consider the ability to raise children as a criterion of *overseers* (1 Timothy 3:4-5 ) What, then, is the biblical (or other) basis for clerical celibacy? How are the passages I mention consistent with this?

God created the world with a process that involves sexuality to bring more people to existence to serve him. It doesn’t seem sustainable; if everyone achieved the degree of spirituality that the continent clergy has, then the population would decrease and no more people would serve God. Why would God benefit from the prohibition of an act which gives existence to other humans that will potentially also serve Him? I read the argument “better focus to serve God by ignoring sexual impulses and distractions,” but in that case having children while controlling sexual impulses and abstaining from time to time makes more sense.

**Question:** What are the theological (not practical) reasons for Catholic priests being celibate? In other words, is celibacy (or at least perpetual continence) essential to the Catholic priesthood? Note that I am not seeking for practical reasons like "If priests were not celibate they would have a harder time keeping a secret known trough confessions," etc. I am seeking for theological reasons (if they exist) that make celibacy fitting from the very notion of priesthood or something like that.

The Catholic Church puts forward to the laity the example of many many saints, in their different dimensions (charity, chastity, prayer, sacrifice, etc), as inspiration to our own lives and challenges. Relatedly, the Catholic Church asks homosexuals to be celibate, so as not to commit sin _contra natura_ (and, given the more recent sexual abuse scandals, partly involving homosexual priests, the Church is more vocal against those who see the religious life merely as an alternative to an active homosexual life). Are there examples of openly homosexual Christians who have taken the suggestion of the Church and "successfully" lived a celibate and fruitful Christian life, **examples that the Church has put forward** to others to imitate? It is common to get into trouble when defending the position of the Church, not the least because it is considered unreasonable by non-Catholics. Yet, the existence of examples could help to "defend" better such position, in my view. PS: the stress on "examples that the Church has put forward" is important here. It is not enough that others beside the Church (e.g. the "LGBT lobby") state that a given saint was homosexual ([here?](https://www.advocate.com/religion/2017/6/02/30-lgbt-saints)) . What matters is that the Church takes a stance on this. Hence the "according to the Catholic Church" qualification.

Could it be possible for a cardinal,or even the pope to have children,if he had been married previously,and then taken up holy orders after being widowed? This would seem to fulfil the requirements of not being married and also being celibate whilst being a priest,but I can't find a definitive answer-all the celibacy guidelines seem to just refer to during the period of the priesthood.

This article [(A Brief History of Celibacy in the Catholic Church)](https://www.futurechurch.org/brief-history-of-celibacy-in-catholic-church) states: > "In the Latin Church, one may be a married priest if one is a life-long Catholic but promises never again to have sexual relations with ones wife." Is that statement true? A married catholic man can become priest if he promises to no longer have sex with his wife? Are there any documents saying that?

What is an overview of the Church Fathers ' views on celibacy? Did they see celibacy as a higher or more spiritual calling than marriage? Did they see marriage as incompatible with a spiritual life? Was there general consensus or was opinion split?

In it's context in the NRSVCE (including section title): > **False Asceticism** > >**4** Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will renounce the faith by paying attention to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, 2 through the hypocrisy of liars whose consciences are seared with a hot iron. 3 **They forbid marriage and demand abstinence from foods**, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. 4 For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected, provided it is received with thanksgiving; 5 for it is sanctified by God’s word and by prayer. (1 Timothy 4:1-5 NRSVCE , emphasis added) This passage appears to list forbidding marriage and demanding abstinence from foods as examples of 'teachings of demons'. It seems that to enter the priesthood in the Latin rite either a promise (for diocesan priests) or a vow (for religious priests) of celibacy is required. The best argument I've seen so far on this issue, argues that this isn't a 'requirement' but only something entered into voluntarily. But on the surface, this argument seems somewhat at odds with language used in some of the sections of the ordination ceremony of the Latin rite subdiaconate: > You ought anxiously to consider again and again what sort of a burden this is which you are taking upon you of your own accord. **Up to this you are free**. You may still, if you choose, turn to the aims and desires of the world (licet vobis pro artitrio ad caecularia vota transire). But if you receive this order (of the subdiaconate) **it will no longer be lawful to turn back** from your purpose. **You will be required** to continue in the service of God, and with His assistance **to observe chastity** and to be bound for ever in the ministrations of the Altar, to serve who is to reign. (Source , emphasis added)* Even if the initial decision was voluntary, the process seems to admit no possibility for a later change. A priest (in the Latin rite) is certainly forbidden from resiling from an earlier intention to remain celibate and to instead pursue marriage. In regard to 'demanding abstinence from foods', I note that there has been a change since Vatican II, but we still have: > On Ash Wednesday and all of the Fridays of Lent, Catholics over the age of 14 are **required** to abstain from meat and from foods made with meat. (Source , emphasis added) Now that doesn't sound particularly voluntary does it? So what is the Catholic understanding of this verse and why isn't it referring to their practices in these areas? ---------- ***edit:*** *I accept Matt Gutting's assurance that the order of the sub-diaconate has been dissolved and the particular text quoted is now only of historical interest and not necessarily a corresponding match to the instructions currently given to modern candidates for the Catholic priesthood. While I'm not sure that this has a significant effect on the underlying issue my question stems from (I'm not aware of a *substantial* change in the character of, or the requirements for the priesthood post-Vatican II), I'm certainly willing to update this reference to current intructions (or the recommended promissory/avowed responses) if someone is kind enough to provide the text for them.

In the answers to this question it is asserted that Mary had taken a vow of celibacy prior to her betrothal to Joseph. Thus, Joseph already knew that he and Mary would never have marital relations prior to the Annunciation. I have never heard this before, so I am wondering when this teaching originated and how close that was to the birth of Christ. Also, were vows of celibacy inside marriage recorded as being practiced at any time in Jewish history?