View Single Post
Old 09-22-2005, 06:39 PM   #9
Prudence
Beelzeboobs, Esq.
 
Prudence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Gavel - I haz it
Posts: 6,287
Prudence is the epitome of coolPrudence is the epitome of coolPrudence is the epitome of coolPrudence is the epitome of coolPrudence is the epitome of coolPrudence is the epitome of coolPrudence is the epitome of coolPrudence is the epitome of coolPrudence is the epitome of coolPrudence is the epitome of coolPrudence is the epitome of cool
Send a message via MSN to Prudence Send a message via Yahoo to Prudence
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eliza Hodgkins 1812
Priests used to be allowed to marry. My understanding is that the Church decided to change this when it realized it would save money by disallowing marriage. A priest who doesn't have to support a wife and family - or leave behind some kind of widow's pension - is a bargain for the church.
Indeed this is true. In fact, it was first sons that were disinherited/declared illegitimate. The church did not want sons of clergy to make inheritance claims on church lands. (Initially, daughters were not a problem.) The church struggled with this for some time with various pushes for celibacy alternating with married popes and such (Leo the something or other). The First Lateran Council in 1123 was pretty emphatic in requiring celibacy.

It's puzzling for me, a non-Catholic, that marriage should be lauded as a sacrament -- not just spiffy but a *holy sacrament* -- and also forbidden to the clergy. It's also puzzling to me as a historian. The various dualist heresies of the middle ages frequently practiced a strict celibacy amongst the lay people (they were also vegitarians -- wouldn't consume the products of coition) and boy did that upset the church! Marry and eat chickens or be burned at the stake!
__________________
traguna macoities tracorum satis de
Prudence is offline   Submit to Quotes Reply With Quote