Trollope on Article XXXII: Of the Marriage of Priests

About the middle of the 11th Century, Priests, at their ordination g^ve a promise of oelibaoy, and bishons were bound by an oath not. to ordain a married man. The Re- formed Church generally declared against these vows ; but, on the other hand, one of the six Articles of Henry YIII. aflirmed that * Priests may not marry by the Law of God.’ With reference to these points the present Article was doubtless framed in 1652, when it consisted of the first clause only : the second was added in the reign of Elizabeth.

2. What were the six Articles j and was their promnlgatLon followed by any important results 7

They were the several provisions of an Act, passed in the year 1539, when the Romish party had regainea the ascend- ancy. The points enforced were TransubstantiatioQi Com- munion in one kind, the celibacy of the Clergy, the oblini- tion of vows of Chastity, private masses, and Auricmar Confession. It was on this occasion that Latimer resigned his bishopric, and retired into private life ; and Cranmer only retained his post in the hopes of preventing still greater concessions.

■

3. To what extent, and under what conditions^ was Celibacy adyocated among the primitive Chris- tians?

Beyond all question the minds of the early Christians were most deeply impressed with a notion of the superior sanctity of a single life : so much so, that the author of the treatise de Remrreotione attributed to Justin even applies the epithet avofxo^ to marriage (i. 3.). See also Igpoat. Epist. ad. Polycarp. o. 6. Athenag. Legat. c. 33. Justin M. Apol. I. cc. 15. 29. Dial. c. 110. Clem. Alex. Strom, vi. 12. loo. Origen. c. Cels. I. 25. It will appear however, from these references, that celibaov, whether Layer Clerical, was so far from being enjoined, tnat it was only allowed on con- dition of the strictist chastity, and on no account to be made the subject of boasting.

4. Is the marriage of the Clergy prohibited in Scripture ; and what do you infer from the sacer- dotal succession under the Mosaic Law ?

There is no command in Scripture which binds the Clergy to celibacy ; but, on the other hand, St. Paul affirms that * marriage is honourable to all’ (Heb. xiii. 4.), and per- mits * every man to have his own wife’ (1 Cor. vii. 2.), without any exception or limitation whatsoever. Under the Jewish dispensation, the priesthood were, as a rule, obliged to marry ; and as the exercise of the sacerdotal functions were vested in the descendants of one family, thus rendering celilracy impossible, it follows that the married state is not incompatible with ministerial effi- ciency.

5. Where any of the Apostles married; and is any thing known of the condition of their fellow-

labourers, which should devote their successors to a single life.

Altbougii it cannot be proved from the New Testament that any of the Apostles, except St. Peter, was a married man ; yet this single instance, of which there is positive evidence (Matt. vili. 14.y, would be suflicient to shew that the celibacy of the Bomish Cler is not supported by Apostolical example. It is more than probable however, from the right asserted bjr St Paul of carrying about a Christian w\fe, — for such is the real import of uie expression dde\priv yvvalxa (1 Cor. ix. 6.), — as well as other Apostles that St. Peter was not the only one who had a wife : and indeed, according to St. Ambrose, in his comment on the Epistles, omnes Apostoli, exceptis Johanne et Paulo, uxores habuisse dicuntur. Philip, one of the seven deacons, was also a mariied man (Acts xzi. 8, 9.) ; and when Aquila travelled about to preach the Gk)spel, his wife Prisoilla ac- companied him. If then Christ did not require celibacy in his Aostles and their fellow-labourers, mere can be no authority for imposing it upon their successors.

6. Do any of the precepts of St. Paul sanction the marriage of the several orders of the Christian ministry f

Among the qualifications of a Bishop, specified by St. Paul, it is expressly stated that he * must be the husband of ‘one wifef and the same is required of presbyt^s and deacons. The Apostle also directs that the Clerry be such as ‘rule their own houses well, having their (Muldren in

• subjection with aK gravity : for if a man know not how to ’ rule his own house, how shall he take care of the Church

• of God?* He adds that * their wives must be ^rave, not ‘slanderers, sober, and faithful in all things;’ and then proceeds to elass ‘forbidding to marry’ among those ’ doc- ‘trines of devils^ characteristic of the apostacy of ^e latter times. See 1 Tim. iii. 2. sqq. iv. 1. 3. Tit. i. 6.

7. How do you account for the favour with which Celibacy was regarded in early times ; and what was the grand motive for making it com- pulsory on the Clergy X

146 QUESTI0I7S AIVD AlfSWEBS OV

From a misapplioation of thoee passages in which both Christ and St. Paul recommend, under certain circum- stances, a single life, a degree of merit was in very early- times attached to voluntary abstinence fi’om marriage, and retirement from the world ; and the reputation for sanctity acquired by Hermits and other recluses, led by degrees to the institution of Monachism, and the principle of clerical celibacy. It was proposed at the Council of Nice that priests should not be permitted to marry ; but, in conse- quence of the ener^tic remonstrance of Paphnutius, the prohibition was limited to the contracting of second mar- riages on the part of the Clergy. A system however, which was calculated to divest the priesthood of the ties of family, and leave them unfettered in the promotion of the interest of the Church, was warmly advocated by the popes; although it was not till the end of the eleventh century (a.d. 1086.), that Gregory VII. succeeded in making it compulsory.

8. Shew that neither our Lord nor St. Paul in- tended to give any general preference to the prin- ciple of Clerical Celibacy.

Our Lord’s admonition (Matt. xix. II, 12.) has imme- diate reference to the circumstances of the times at which it was delivered; and that of St. Paul (I Cor. vii. 26.) is manifestly limited, by the expi*ession Sid rijv evearQaav dvdyKfiVf to the Church of Corinth in its then condition of present and expected persecution. Marriage, upon the very occasion in question, is represented by Christ as a divine institution, ordained in the time of man’s innocency : so that although the early propagation of the Gospel, ana the dangers attending it, might render it advisable to be free for a time from the unavoidable incumbrances of the married state, a temporary caution can never have the force of a law universally binding. Besides, our Lord does not actually recommend celibacy; he mercJy permits it, provided a person can so effectually restrain his passions as to run no risque of falling into sin : and this, it has been shrewdly re- marked, amounts to a virtual prohibition with the great majority of mankind. St. Paul also distinctly leaves the expediency of marriage to the judgment of each individual : and, at all events, his words have nothing to do with olerioai celibacy in particular, since men and women without dis- tinction are mcluded in the advice.

9. May not, however, a single state be in some cases desirable ; or is our Church to be considered as condemning celibacy altogether ?

Doubtless there may be individuals, who, io the siaoere and earnest devotion of their hearts to the service of their Redeemer, may feel that the anxieties and oares of married life would impede their exertions and distract their mi ads ; nor is there any things in this Article that censures a state of Celibacy. It is merely affirmed that all Christian men, Clergy as well as Lait^, may marry, or not, at their own diaeretionj as thej shall jtu^e the same to serve better to god- lineae. Celibacy is only not comjemZwry; and ifwe may judge from the dissolute morals of the Romish Clergy at the period of the Reformation, it will abundantly appear that the remo- val of the prohibition to marry, was a step by which the iuterests of religion were most essentially advanced.

10. Shew from the impure morals of the Romish Clergy that an enforced Celibacy is pernicious.

Bishop Jewel, in his Apolo^, affirms that ’ from the ’ law, which compels them to cehbacy, has flowed incredible ’ lawlessness of life and conversation to the ministers of ’ God ;* and he adduces ample proof of his affirmation. It will suffice to mention that several of the Romish Canonists look upon fomioation as no sin ; that Cardinal Campegio and others have taught that the priest, who keeps a concu- bine, leads a holier and chaster life than a priest who has taken a wife in marriage ; and that an enormous tribute was levied by a long succession of popes upon licensed brothels.

11. Name any of the early Fathers who are known to have been married ; and shew that they did not consider a married life inconsistent with ministerial usefulness.

We have an acknowledged instance of clerical marriage in TertuUian, a presbyter of the second centuiy, who na* left a treatise, in two books, addressed to hie Wife, It is true that he continually and strongly expresses himself in favour of celibacy, and the Romanists say that after he became a priest, he ceased to cohabit with his wife : but this is mere

assertion without a shadow of proof; and his writings abound with evidence that in his time the clergy were at liberty to marry. A letter is also extant from Hilary of Poic- tiers to his daughter, who was in all probability bom after he had been made a bishop. As to the pei’fect compatibility of marriage with the clencal duties, Clement of Alexandria, though a decided patron of celibaey, not only states that some of the Apostles were married and had cnildren, but that if Christ nimself did not marry, it was because the Church was his bride (Strom, iir. 693.30: 535. 16.). St. Chrysostom fOper. T. xi. p. 738.) aflirms that it is agree- able both wUh the law qf God and man to ascend the episco- pal throne in the marriage state ; Gregory of Nazianzum (Orat. Funeb. xix.) observes that a lalorums and pious bishop executes his qffiee nothing the morse^ but rather more prqfitably, as a married man ; and Theophylact (on Titus, p. 843.) infers that marriage is no hindrance to virtue, since the chii^qfthe Apostles had his wife.