|
Hi, Dean —
I would never argue that there were
no difficulties with some "priest's
son" inheriting property, however,
if you think about it, there were
ways of dealing with "property" other
than the total prohibition of having
children. This is the myth that is
implied, and that you have stumbled
upon. That myth-rumor, I believe,
was begun by "forces" within
the post-Vatican II Church attempting
to minimalize and de-sacralize the
underlying reasons for the celibacy
discipline within the Church.
The real reason for celibacy is found
in "the Kingdom of Heaven".
The Lord Himself described those
in the Kingdom as sons of the Resurrection,
where there is neither marrying nor
giving in marriage. He then told
the stunned disciples, totally blown
away by His teaching on marriage
and the total prohibition of divorce,
that if they found this tough, even
tougher was the reality of those "eunuch's
for the sake of the Kingdom".
(See Matthew 19)
Saint Paul, in prophetic and apostolic
earnest was likewise celibate, and
for the first, but not last, time
introduced the idea that it was a
higher calling; as we find his statements
in 1 Corinthians 7. (Side note: Jeremiah
was celibate and greatly influenced
Paul.) I, of course, recognize
that Paul did not associate celibacy
in any absolute way with what we
would call Holy Orders, as witnessed by the three Pastoral Letters and
his instructions concerning bishops,
presbyters and deacons.
The enshrining of (celibacy|virginity)
can be found once again in the eschatological
Book of Revelation, speaking of the
144,000 virgin-martyrs. It is hard
to differentiate whether they were martyrs, and thus analogously virgins
(not contaminated by the world),
or virgin-celibates and thus analogously
martyrs having died to the world.
Either way, however, as early as
the end of the first century, there
is already a certain emphasis, and
even concentration on, those called
to virginity-celibacy in the early
Church.
With Anthony of Egypt, and the movement
to the desert, begins a great movement
in the Church that picks up on this
heroic lifestyle. These Desert Fathers
were seen to be super Christians (as were the martyrs). Their lives
were legendary, but then this was
enshrined through the writing of Athanasius and the life of Anthony.
This writing, which obviously, was
more than simply biographical, enshrined
this higher calling for generations.
It influenced Augustine's circle
of friends and led to their and his
conversion.
The laity in the early Church did
not see the Desert Fathers and their
celibate lifestyles as a put down on their lay life or marriages.
Instead, they also placed these early
heroes on pedestals, recognizing
in them the call to holiness all
share in. The clergy were not threatened
by them either; except some bishops
thought that they were getting "out
of hand" and needed to be "tamed".
The first taming came with the Council
of Michaela, in 325 A.D. in its canons
which stated and halted (at least
for a time) the connecting of
celibacy and Holy Orders. The Council forbade making celibacy mandatory
on all clergy.
This is an interesting ruling. Again,
remember it is a ruling, not a teaching.
If one looks at it again, it means
that already by 325 A.D. there was
a good-sized movement within the
Church calling for a celibate Holy
Orders. The fact that the discipline
was necessary is fascinating. The reason for the "prohibition" was
simple. There is no absolute connection
between celibacy and Holy Orders in the Apostolic
tradition.
This fact is still recognized within
all of Christianity! Suffice it to
say, celibacy and its reasons go far deeper than some middle age priest's
will.
Father Francis
|
