Section — Wouters, Manual of Moral Theology
Scholion. On Celibacy
(St. Thomas, II-II, q. 152, aa. 1-5; Supplementum, q. 41, a. 2; Contra Gentiles, book 3, c. 136 sq.; on book 4 of the Sentences, dist. 26, q. 1, a. 2; Opusc. 18, De Perfectione vitae spiritualis, c. 8; St. Alphonsus, Theologia Moralis, book VI, nn. 806-812.)
I. Notion. Celibacy is understood as the state of major clerics, insofar as they are bound to abstain from entering marriage, or, if perhaps before the reception of the subdiaconate they entered it, from the use of it. Sometimes celibacy is taken for the state of perfect chastity, to which major clerics are bound.
II. Origin. The author of the law of celibacy is the Church, not Christ. This is already deduced from the fact that the Church tolerates the practice of the Greeks, and also in the Latin Church has several times dispensed in celibacy; indeed, it even concedes to inferior ministers the faculty of dispensing in some cases, except nevertheless if there is question of the presbyterate (cf. cann. 1043-1045).
III. History. In both the Greek and Latin Church it has always been prohibited that a cleric enter marriage after receiving the diaconate.1 Leo I extended the same thing to subdeacons.2 Besides, from the beginnings of the Church the practice was that major clerics abstain from the use of a marriage perhaps contracted previously.3 But in the Greek Church the contrary practice gradually prevailed to such a degree that the Trullan Synod, also called Quinisext, issued a decree by which the use of a marriage previously entered is conceded to Subdeacons, Deacons, and Presbyters.4 The Holy See tolerated that decree, although it desires that perfect chastity be observed by clerics also in the Greek Church.5 For the rest, major clerics cannot enter marriage, and Bishops are bound to perfect chastity.
1 Cf. Thomassinus, Vetus et nova Ecclesiae disciplina, part I, book 2, c. 60 sq.; Vlaming, Institutiones iuris ecclesiastici, part 3, n. 495 sq.
2 De Jong, Handboek der Kerkgeschiedenis, vol. I, § 14, 50.
3 De Jong, loc. cit.; witnesses are Origen (Homily 23 on Numbers, n. 3), Eusebius (Demonstratio Evangelica, book 1, c. 9), St. Cyril of Jerusalem (Catechesis 12, n. 24 sq.).
4 Canon 13.
5 Constitution Etsi pastoralis, 26 May, § 7, n. 25.
IV. Suitability. Celibacy is especially fitting for clerics: 1° because a more perfect state, such as celibacy is, is fitting for those who excel others in dignity; 2° because the state of continence is especially desired in those who are bound to be occupied continually with holy and pure mysteries; 3° because one who is free from the cares of marriage better can fulfill his duties of praying, preaching, teaching, administering the sacraments, visiting the sick, etc.1
Objection 1. Celibacy is opposed to the precept of preserving and propagating the human species; therefore it is dishonorable.
Response 1. If the conclusion were valid, all who, being capable of entering marriage, refused to enter it would act dishonorably.
Response 2. The precept of preserving and propagating the human species does not oblige individual persons, because that precept alone obliges individual persons which first of itself regards the good of individuals. But the precept of preserving and propagating the human species does not first of itself regard the good of individuals, but the good of the multitude or species (St. Thomas, Contra Gentiles, book 3, c. 137; II-II, q. 152, a. 2). For the rest, even if the said precept does not regard individual persons, no danger from it threatens the propagation of the species or the end intended by God instituting marriage; for, considering the very great inclination of men toward the act of generation, the number of those who will remain in celibacy will always be relatively very small.
For the rest, note that the common good consists not only in a number raised to the highest point, but in the happiness of the multitude, which indeed is promoted more by clerics who observe celibacy than by those who are entangled in the cares of marriage and family (St. Thomas, II-II, loc. cit.).
Objection 2. The law of celibacy does injury to clerics.
Response. I deny the assertion, since the Church does not impose the burden of celibacy on the unwilling, but on those freely embracing the clerical state.
Objection 3. The law of celibacy involves what seems morally impossible.
Response. Experience proves the contrary. Then, the adversaries do not think about the special grace of state. Further, the obligation of celibacy is undertaken at that age and after such a testing of life that it is lawful to hope safely that, with divine grace assisting, it can be observed without difficulty.
Objection 4. Celibacy provides occasion for sins of lust.
Response. The said sins are first indeed exaggerated; then they are compensated by the countless goods arising from celibacy.
Finally, experts testify that celibacy also does not harm health.2
1 Cf. 2 Tim. II, 3; 1 Cor. VII, 32.
2 Cf. our little work De virtute castitatis et de vitiis oppositis, n. 18.
V. Excellence. Celibacy is preferred to the matrimonial state.1 It is de fide from the Council of Trent: If anyone says that the conjugal state is to be placed before the state of virginity or celibacy, and that it is not better and more blessed to remain in virginity or celibacy than to be joined in Matrimony, let him be anathema.2 This is established first from Sacred Scripture: "His disciples say to him: If the case of a man with his wife is so, it is not expedient to marry. He said to them: Not all receive this word, but those to whom it has been given. For there are eunuchs ... who have castrated themselves for the kingdom of heaven. He who can receive it, let him receive it."3 Then it is proved from this, that celibacy, that is, immunity from spouse and family with the things annexed to them, when undertaken with a right intention, favors a more intense service of God and neighbor.
1 Cf. our little work De virtute castitatis et de vitiis oppositis, n. 18.