III. In ike Chttrek o/'idome.— Siridns, bishop of Rome (A.D. 885), decided against the Canon of Oangra (ad Hmer. Tarraamemem^ ep. i, c 7, hi c. 8, 4,dist. Ixxxii), assertfaig that tho reason why, hi the O. T., priests were allowed to marry, was because they could be taken only from the tribe of Levi He argued, therefore, as no such trikMd limitation exists in the Christian Church, that cbtaoM aq>iditaies (JL e. marriage) are in- consistent with the clerical office. The Roman bish- ops after Siricins adhered to his theory, and the Church generally seems to have followed them (Decretals of In- nocent I, A.D. 404, 405, c 4-6, dist xxxi ; of Leo 1, 446- 456, in c i, dist. xxxii; c 10, dist xxzi, etc ; Conc% Garth, ii, A.D. 890, c 2, in c. 8, dist xzxi ; c. 8, dist Uxxiv ; Cone Carth. v, A.D. 401, c 8, fn c. 18, dist. xxzH ; c 4, dist. Ixxxiv, etc.). The prohibition ap- plied at first only to biBhops, priests, and deacons, but from the fifth century onward subdeacons were pro- hibited marriage after ordination (Leo I, A.D. 446, in e. 1, dist. xxxii ; Gregory I, A.D. 591-94, in c. 1, dist xxxi; c 2, dist. xxxii ; Cone. Agath. A.D. 506, c. 89, in c 19, dist. xxxiv, etc.). The clergy of the minor orders were allowed to marry once, but not with wid- ows (Cone Carth. v, A.D. 401, c. 8, in c. 18, dist xxxii ; Greg. I, A.D. 601, in c 8). The civil law confirmed these regulations, enacting that married persons, or inch as had children or grandchildren, should not be chosen as bishops. It was futher enjoined by the dTil law that all marriages of higher clergy after their ordination should be held as invalid, and the children of su6h marriages illegitimate (Herzog^ JiedUEncyklO' i>&fe, vii, 772).
For centuries this question of the celibacy of the clergy was a subject of constant struggle within the Church. Unnatural crimes abounded among the cler- gy; their office, in the ninth and tenth centuries, seemed to be held as a license for excess (Neander, dKrek Bktory, iv, 94). Many priests lived openly in wedlock, although the coundls were always issuing new orders against them. '* Popes Leo IX (1048- 1054) and Nicolas II (1058-1061) interdicted all priests that had wives or concubines tntm the exercise of any spiritual function, on pain of excommunication. Alex- snder II (1061-1078) decreed excommunication against an who should attend a mass celebrated by a priest hav- hig a wife or concubine. This decision was renewed by Gregory VII (Hildebrand) in a oonncil held at Rome in 1074, and a decretal was issued that every layman who should receive the communion from the hands of a msrried priest should be excommnnicated, and that
every priest who married or lived in concubinage shoidd be deposed. The decree met with the most vi- olent opposition in all countries, but Gregory succeed- ed in carrying it out with the greatest rigor; and, though individual instances of married priests were still to be found in the twelfth and thirteenth centu- ries, the celibacy of the Roman Catholic clergy was es- tablished, and has since continued both in theory and practice" (Chambers, s. v.). Nevertheless, after the Refonnation, the question came up ; and at the Coun- cil of Trent (1545-1568) several bishops, and the em- peror Charles V, fitvored a relaxation of the rule. But the majority of voices decided that God would not withhold the gift of chastity from those that rightiy prayed for it, and the rule of celibacy was thus finally and forever imposed on the ministers of the Roman Catholic Church. Those who have only received the lower Idnds of consecration may marry on resigning their office. For all grades above a sub-deacon, a pa- pal dispensation is necessary. A priest that marries incurs excommunication, and is incapable of any spir- itual ftmction. If a married man wishes to become a priest, he receives consecration only on condition that he separate from his wife, and that she of her free will consent to the separation, and enter a religious order, t>r take the vow of chastity ($e$t, xxiv, can, ix). It is a question among divines of the Roman communion whether the law of the celibacy of clerks be of divine right, i. e. whether marriage is by holy Scripture for- bidden to the clergy, or whether it is only of ecclesi- astical authority, and binding on each clergyman in consequence of the vow to that efi^ect voluntuily made at his ordination. Their best and most moderate writ- ers maintain the second view.
IV. In tke Greek Chttrek.^TlM Greek Church has never adopted the law of celibacy absolutely for all its clergy, but adheres, in substance, to the ancient canon law. The Council in TruUo (A.D. 692) enacted that, though bishops may observe celibacy, yet presbyters and deacons might live with their wives (c. 14 ; Cone. Chalc. A.D. 451, c 8, 6, 12, 18, 48; Cone. Trullan, A.D. 692, can. 7, 18). In the Russian Church, a par- ish priest must be married before ordination ; if he loses his wife, he generally enters a monastery ; or, if he marries again, he lays aside his priestiy ftinctions (Neale, Voices from the Eatt^ p. 58). Celibacy is to this day enjobied upon the bishops, who are therefore generally chosen from the monks, or from widowed presbyters; but as to the lower clergy, while the can- ons forbid the marriage of priests, deacons, and sub- deacons, after ardhatum^ they do not forbid the ordina^ tion of mtfried men, nor require them to abstain from the conversation of their wives. In the Armenian Church marriage is imperative; an unmarried man cannot be ordained ; but he cannot marry again. The Vartabede (regulars), on the other hand, take the vow of celibacy, live in convents, and from their ranks the bishops are chosen (Dwight, in Coleman's Ancient Ckri^iamtf, ch. xxvii, § 2) ; and the Romish Church allowed this in the case of the Greeks, Uaronites, etc. who united with her (Benedict XIV, in the constit Et$i PastoraUe of May 26, 1742 [Bu/Ztir. Magn, ed, Zmx- emb, t. xvi, fol. 100, and his Eo quamnie tempore. May 4, 1745, t. xvi, 6, 296]). The priesU of the united Greek Church have received permission from the popes to continue in marriage, if entered into before conse^ oration, but on condition of always living apart from their wives three days before they celebrate mass. There have been discussions in the Roman Church even in regard to the validity or nullity of marriages among the Copts and Greeks entered into after ordination (see BnUar, Magn, t xviii, p. 67). *'The Greek Church difiers from the Latin, not by any higher standard of marriage, but only by a closer adherence to earlier usage, and by less consistent application of the ascetic principle. It is hi theory as remote from the evan- gelical Protestant Church as the Latin is, and ap-