Benedict: If celibacy, then heterosexual marriage

Print More


Well, take a look at the pope’s response last Thursday to a request from a European priest that he “speak on ‘the profundity and authentic significance of ecclesiastical
celibacy’ also in view of the ‘worldly criticisms’ to which it has been
subjected,” as transcribed by Rocco. Benedict begins by portraying celibacy as a way of demonstrating in this world how we will live with God in the next: “to show the reality of the future which we must live here in the
present, and in this way bear witness to our faith.”

He then goes on to claim that celibacy is

an act of faithfulness and trust, an act which presupposes the
faithfulness of marriage, … which is the biblical form, the natural
form, of being man and woman, foundation of the great Christian culture
and of other great cultures of the world. If this is lost, the roots of
our culture will be destroyed. Thus celibacy confirms the ‘yes’ of
marriage with its ‘yes’ to the world to come. This is how we wish to
proceed and actualise this scandal of a faith which founds all of
existence on God.

OK, I can see that celibacy may be considered a special kind of godliness. It’s certainly an ancient Christian practice, even though it was originally just part of the monastic vocation–and though, to this day, a married priesthood is the norm in Eastern Orthodoxy. Moreover, the use of marital–to say nothing of (heter-) erotic imagery to describe the individual’s relationship to Christ is longstanding and central to the Catholic imagination–cf. St. Bernard’s sermons on the Song of Songs.

But it’s something else again to turn celibacy’s “yes” to God into an argument for the “yes” to heterosexual marriage–as if there were some kind of Great Chain of Marital Being by which heterosexual marriage is transformed into a unique metaphysical preparation for a spiritual marriage with God in heaven, about which we are enlightened by the example of thisworldly clerical celibacy.

This is hardly Pauline “better to marry than to burn” theology. Nor is it calculated to mitigate the power of clericalism in contemporary Catholicism.

Update: Sandro Magister has the official text of Benedict’s response, plus he calls attention to a speech to the Curia of 2006 in which he dilates on the importance of clerical celibacy.

  • Phil Steinacker

    I’m just passing through, so I don’t have time to write a deep explanation for you, but Benedict is exactly right. It will defeat you if you try to do only a cursory study of it, but the Theology of the Body explains how the communion of human persons in marriage reflects the Communion of Person in the Trinity.
    There is no sound byte of an explanation to compete with the sound byte “logic” used by those seeking to challenge Church teaching, but maleness and femaleness are essential to marriage. We don’t ordinarily use the term heterosexual to describe marriage except in response to a politicization of what is actually both Sacramental and sacramental. The term is not relevant in Creation, and the political exception is a human creation by those dissatisfied with the order of things made by the Creator. Sadly, they continuously express their dissatisfaction with that which they cannot ultimately change.
    Not only should you trust Benedict’s authority, you are on firm ground if you first accept his authority to be a ggod shepherd and then his credentials as a theologian.
    His writings are so easily accessable, even if you lack a theology degree. Take a shot of hmuility (we all need to do so) and read him on this and other subjects, and as you do so hush your interior counter-thinking and just “listen.”