The Church's Authority in Discipline
PREVIOUS 117 NEXT

Title
Contents
Preface
Introduction
Chapter 1
Chapter 2
Chapter 3
Chapter 4
Chapter 5
Chapter 6
Chapter 7
Chapter 8
Chapter 9
Chapter 10
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C



Site Search:

powered by
FreeFind

Copyright & Credit

  Article  XXXII

OF THE MARRIAGE OF PRIESTS[1]

Bishops, Priests, and Deacons are not commanded by God’s Law, either to vow the estate of single life, or to abstain from marriage: therefore it is lawful also for them, as for all other Christian men, to marry at their own discretion, as they shall judge the same to serve better to godliness.

 

The Anglican Church in this Article also exercises her authority to abolish the pre‑Reformation law of the celibacy of the clergy.  It is well known that the Jewish priests married,[2] and that the High Priest’s office was hereditary.[3]  St. Paul’s views on marriage vary; sometimes he prefers the unmarried state,[4] probably due to his belief that Christ’s Second Coming was imminent;[5] at other tunes he regarded the married state as normal in the Church.[6]  Our Lord recognized the value of celibacy in certain circumstances,[7] but by His attendance at the wedding in Cana[8] and in His teaching He stressed the sanctity of marriage as a Divine institution.[9]  In fact, so sacred is it, that it is portrayed as a type of ‘the union betwixt Christ and His Church’.[10]  St. Peter was a married man,[11] as were ‘the rest of the Apostles and the brethren of the Lord,’[12] and the Pastoral Epistles require both deacons and bishops to be the ‘husband of one wife’.[13]  There is, therefore, no Biblical authority for imposing celibacy as an universal condition upon all clergy: on the contrary, ‘forbidding to marry’ is classed with ‘doctrines of devils’.[14]

No law enforcing clerical celibacy was passed until the fourth century.  There is ample evidence of married clergy in the earliest centuries of the Church’s life.  For instance, Clement of Alexandria (150‑216 A.D.) mentions married priests and deacons,[15] and the historian Socrates refers to a married episcopate in the Eastern Churches.[16]  The Council of Nicaea (325 A.D.) refused to enforce celibacy.  In the Eastern Church celibacy is not enforced upon priests and deacons, though bishops have been expected to observe celibacy since the time of the Emperor Justinian (527‑565 A.D.).  In Western Christendom, the Popes have used their influence to promote celibacy since the fourth century, when Pope Siricius in 385 A.D. issued a decree to the Bishop of Tarragona, forbidding the marriage of priests and deacons.

But despite Papal decrees and decisions of Councils, celibacy was not universally observed, and did not become the universal law of the English Church until the time of Anselm in 1102 A.D.  A Roman Catholic writer says, ‘Clerical celibacy is not a divine law, but a Church law dating only from the fourth century.  It does not depend on precedent; it is founded on the Church's estimate of the more perfect following of Christ by her clergy.’[17]  The Anglican Church, following the teaching of Christ and the Apostles, permits celibacy to those who prefer it, but does not enforce it as an universal law.  We recognize that ‘There is nothing in marriage that cannot be consecrated to the service of God.’[18]  Clergy of the Anglican Communion are therefore free ‘to marry at their own discretion, as they shall judge the same to serve better to godliness.’



[1]This Article was written by Parker in 1563; the 1553 Article on the subject was less positive.

[2]Judges 20:28.

[3]The High Priest was succeeded by his son, or son-in-law (John 18:13).

[4]1 Cor. 7:1, 7 f., 38.

[5]1 Cor. 7:29, 31.

[6]Col. 3:18 ff.; 1 Cor. 9:5.

[7]Matt. 19:10-12.

[8]John 2.

[9]Matt. 5:32, 19:9; Mark 10:5 ff.; Luke 16:18.

[10]Ephes. 5:22 ff.

[11]Mark 1:30.

[12]1 Cor. 9:5 (Moffatt).

[13]1 Tim. 3:2, 12; Tit. 1:5 f.; cf. Acts 21:9.

[14]1 Tim. 4:3.

[15]Strom. 3:12.

[16]Hist. Eccles. 5:22.

[17]Rev. Bertrand L. Conway, of the Paulist Fathers, in The Question Box (1929) p. 317.

[18]E. J. Bicknell, Op. cit., p. 314.

PREVIOUS 117 NEXT