Folia Canonica 4. (2001)

STUDIES - Pablo Gefaell: Clerical Celibacy

80

PABLO GEFAELL

as perfectly legitimate. We need, nevertheless, to look for the origins of the disciplinary contrast between East and West, investigating the common discipline that precedes the clear divergence evidenced in the canons of the Council of Trullo (aD. 691), which are the fundamental basis for the discipline of the oriental Churches.16

With this, we will see that, contrarily to what was generally thought, it is not quite clear that the present oriental discipline of married priests and deacons who engage in marital relations corresponds to that of the genuine praxis of the primitive Church: rather, one can reasonably doubt about it. In fact, there are many data indicating that the practice common to the East and to the West previous to the so-called “Quinisext council” was that of a married but continent clergy. That is: to a large extent the clergy came from men married and advanced in age who - with the acquiescence of their wives - made the commitment to live in total and perpetual continence. The Latin Church, therefore, with the gradual introduction of the requisite of celibacy for young candidates to the priesthood since the IVth century,17 has not made harsher the original practice of continent clergy. One should speak rather of a mitigation of the primitive

For example, PO 16: Perfect and perpetual continence for the sake of the Kingdom of Heaven, commended by Christ the Lord and through the course of time as well as in our own days freely accepted and observed in a praiseworthy manner by many of the faithful, is held by the Church to be of great value in a special manner for the priestly life. It is at the same time a sign and a stimulus for pastoral cltarity and a special source of spiritual fecundity in the world. Indeed, it is not demanded by the very nature of the priesthood, as is apparent from the practice of the early Church and from the traditions of the Eastern Churches, where, besides those who with all the bishops, by a gift of grace, choose to observe celibacy, there are also married priests of highest merit. This holy synod, while it commends ecclesiastical celibacy, in no way intends to alter that different discipline which legitimately flourishes in the Eastern Churches. It permanently exhorts all those who have received the priesthood and marriage to persevere in their holy vocation so that they may fully and generously continue to expend themselves for the sake of the flock commended to them, FLANNERY (ed.), Vatican Council (nt. 13), 891-892.

16 We will see later the case of the Assirian Church of the East (see footnote n. 27).

17 The introduction was made gradually: in a first moment, married men entered priesthood with the promise of perpetual continence (cf. canon 33 of the council of Elvira, see below, footnote n. 28). Afterwards, the need of providing for celibate candidates to major Orders and of reducing more and more married clergy was accentuated. The matrimonial impediment of sacred Orders was introduced by can. 7 of the second Lateran council (a. 1139), this caused the error of considering celibacy as introduced in the Latin Church by this council, while actually the discipline was already in practice many centuries before. The limitation of sacred Orders to only celibate candidates was eventually introduced after the council of Trent. In fact, can. 13 of the XXIIIth Session requested an intention of perpetual continence to the candidates to subdeaconate and deaconate (no novelty here). But can. 18 of this same Session of the council established the Seminary as a means for educating young candidates to priesthood, who consequently would arrive to subdeaconate being celibates (non married); cf. Stickler, II celibato (nt. 14), 23, 25 and 29-30.