When adherence to God’s natural reproductive design and the moral law of human sexuality as taught by the Catholic Church is ridiculed as prudish or extreme, it should be no shock to anyone that her teaching regarding celibacy is seen as a sort of a neutered aberration. To understand celibacy we must first understand the most basic fact of our sexuality—that is, we are created male and female. Thus our sexuality is primarily a matter of being, not behavior. Celibacy bears witness to this truth in a preeminent way.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church states, “Christian virgins, called by the Lord to cling only to him with greater freedom of heart, body, and spirit, have decided with the Church’s approval to live in a state of virginity” (922; emphasis added). As this statement points out, celibacy also bears strong witness to true sexual liberation. For liberation consists of man being able to master his passions rather than giving in to his whims.
Eastern religions such as Hinduism and Buddhism also believe this. Although these religions have erroneous ideas in regard to celibacy, they do see its value and radiate much of its goodness in their monasticism.
Celibacy and marriage are not two competing vocations but are dependent upon and elevate one another. It is not by coincidence that times of crisis for marriage (such as our present time in which the divorce rates are astronomical) are also times of crisis for consecrated celibacy.
Although celibacy is objectively superior to marriage, it does not diminish the goods of marriage. In fact, celibacy elevates the good of marriage. It is a superiority that totally gives itself for the good of marriage. It also makes itself dependent on the good of marriage for its life. This interdependence of marriage and celibacy is not only spiritual but physical as well. After all, in order for a person to be able to embrace celibate love he has to be created, and the way God creates man is through the marital embrace. In this light, it is not by mistake that the family is seen as the source of priestly and religious vocations.
It is also not by mistake that the greatest defenders of the covenant of marriage are celibates, and likewise the greatest defenders of celibacy are married people. This is not the result of a “grass is greener on the other side ” mentality—that is too shallow a view. It is because the goodness of the one elevates the goodness of the other.
Even though celibacy is the objectively superior state, this does not mean that it is for everyone. Our Lord makes this very clear when he says, “Not all men can accept this precept, but only those to whom it is given. . . . There are those who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to receive this let him receive it” (Matt. 19:11–12).
In addition, celibacy is not the superior state for all people. Aquinas states, ” Though virginity is better than conjugal continence, a married person may be better than a virgin for two reasons. First, on the part of chastity itself; if to wit, the married person is more prepared in mind to observe virginity, if it should be expedient, than the one who is actually a virgin. Secondly, because perhaps the person who is not a virgin has some more excellent virtue” (Summa Theologiae I:152:4).
Augustine admonishes virgins to say, “I am no better than Abraham, although the chastity of celibacy is better than the chastity of marriage” (On the Good of Matrimony 7). Augustine also states, “Whence does a virgin know the things that belong to the Lord, however solicitous she be about them, if perchance on account of some mental fault she be not yet ripe for martyrdom, whereas this woman to whom she delighted in preferring herself is already able to drink the cup of the Lord?”
These statements underscore the fact that celibacy is a gift. This is not something one can take upon one’s self for reasons of pride or human respect. The very essence of a gift is its reciprocity, meaning the giving and receiving are simultaneous. It is only when we become willing to give ourselves completely are we able truly to receive. This is especially crucial in a proper understanding of sexual love, whether it be celibate or marital. It is also crucial that this be understood on an individual level, particularly when making discernment in regards to celibacy and marriage.
Someone may choose either marriage or celibacy for the wrong reasons. These can range from a low sense of self-worth (particularly in relation to the opposite sex), bad experiences in dating, or just giving up on the hope of finding a marriage partner. Some men make the mistake of choosing celibacy as the “cover charge” for becoming priests instead of as a good in and of itself that should be desired.
This sort of reductionist view obscures the meaning of celibacy and has a devastating effect on these men and those around them. It also betrays a serious misunderstanding of celibacy and the priesthood. The canonical requirement of celibacy for priests in the Western Church is not forced upon anyone. In a proper sense, priests are men who freely choose celibacy “for the sake of the kingdom of heaven.” After all, it is the vow or promise of celibacy that comes first, not ordination.
The Eastern churches have a different canonical custom that allows married men to be ordained to the priesthood, but once they are ordained they may not marry, even in the event of the death of the spouse. Still, many candidates for the priesthood in the East freely choose celibacy. All bishops in the East are consecrated from the ranks of the monks, who are all celibate. The harmoniously different canonical customs of both East and West not only show a deep interconnection between celibacy and the priesthood, they also bear witness to the great freedom of celibacy.
In light of this, doing away with the canonical discipline of priestly celibacy in the West would not solve the problem of the shortage of priests. In the Eastern church, where married men are accepted as priests, there are shortages. Furthermore, doing away with the canonical discipline of priestly celibacy would involve the additional problem of divorced priests. Unfortunately, this is something not unknown in Protestant churches with their married ministers.
The priest shortage is a problem of faith, not a result of the discipline of celibacy. These faith problems manifest themselves in the serious misunderstanding of the truth and meaning of human sexuality and, consequently, a serious drop in the world’s birthrates because of contraception, sterilization, and abortion. When human sexuality is not properly understood in its totality of the gift of oneself, celibacy is also misunderstood. In light of today’s severe crisis in the area of sexuality, we need the witness of celibacy all the more.
The difficulties of the celibate life should not be minimized. Needless to say, chaste sexuality even in marriage is difficult because of man’s potent appetite tainted with original sin. Chaste sexuality in the context of celibacy is even more difficult. This makes itself felt with a tremendous force in times in which we presently live, when the dignity of human sexuality is so badly obscured.
Celibate love that is freely and joyfully embraced amidst these difficulties bears an even greater witness to it as a “pearl of great price,” not the price one pays.