Discussion of Christian sexual ethics naturally raises the question of celibacy. Specifically, is life-long celibacy a viable option for every person or only for those with a unique capacity for it?[1] Can or should it ever be mandated? Below are comments from Christian thinkers across history that insist life-long celibacy is not possible for all people.
Paul the Apostle (c. 10–60s). Paul championed celibacy, believing an unmarried life allows a person greater availability for ministry. But despite his positive view of permanent abstinence, he did not believe it was feasible for everyone, conceding, “If they do not have self-control , they should marry” (1 Cor 7:9; NASB).
Ambrose of Milan (337–397). The church fathers and mothers often considered celibacy superior to marriage, even to the point of encouraging married couples to cease having sexual relations, particularly after child-bearing years. They went beyond Paul’s ministerial rationale for celibacy to assert that life-long abstinence makes a person purer. Sex and sexual desire were deemed tainted by the fall. Yet even church leaders who extoled life-long virginity, did not claim such a commitment was feasible for all people. Bishop Ambrose wrote, “For virginity cannot be commanded, but must be wished for, for things which are above us are matters for prayer rather than under mastery.”[2] He further states, “I do not discourage marriage, but recapitulate the advantages of holy virginity. The latter is the gift of few only, the former is of all.”[3]
John Chrysostom (347–407). Long before the Protestant Reformation challenged the prevailing view that celibacy is superior to marriage, church fathers were already interpreting Paul’s statement in 1 Cor 7:9 as scriptural evidence that life-long abstinence is not possible for everyone. “Do you see the strong sense of Paul how he both signifies that continence is better, and yet puts no force on the person who cannot attain to it; fearing lest some offense arise?”[4]
Augustine (354–430). Augustine believed that celibacy is superior to marriage, even though he found practicing abstinence difficult. After sending away his partner of fifteen years, apparently at the demands of his mother who wanted him to have a lawful wife rather than a concubine, he found a second concubine to fulfill his sexual desires while waiting for his betrothed to come of age. He saw marriage as a necessary protection against promiscuity. Nevertheless, still aspiring to celibacy, he broke his betrothal to become a priest.
Concerning marriage, he counseled, “For for this purpose are they married, that the lust being brought under a lawful bond, should not float at large without form and loose; having of itself weakness of flesh that cannot be curbed, but of marriage fellowship of faith that cannot be dissolved . . . Therefore married persons owe one another not only the faith of their sexual intercourse itself, for the begetting of children, which is the first fellowship of the human kind in this mortal state; but also, in a way, a mutual service of sustaining one another’s weakness, in order to shun unlawful intercourse.”[5]
Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274). Aquinas examined the question of life-long celibacy by looking to Scripture. He noted that Paul speaks favorably of permanent abstinence, but surmised that the apostle cannot have had in mind all people because that would result in the cessation of procreation and discontinuation of the human species. That in turn would prevent the full number of people elected for salvation to come to pass. He interpreted Paul to prefer celibacy only for specific individuals and not all people simultaneously: “He tells the reason why he permitted marriage as a concession, namely, because each one has not received from God so much virtue as to enable him to practice total continence, as the Lord himself said: ‘Not all men can receive this saying. . . He who is able to receive this, let him receive it’ (Matt. 19:11, 12).”[6]
Aquinas likened the gift of celibacy to the parable of talents; some have been given five talents, while other might have only two. In other words, each person has different abilities when it comes to sexual abstinence (Matt 25:15; Wis 8:21). He concludes, “[B]ut each one has his own gift; as if to say: not everyone has received from God the gift of continence. Hence he says, if they cannot exercise self-control, that is, if they have not yet received this gift, they should marry, that is, be joined in matrimony: ‘I would have younger widows marry’ (1 Tim. 5:14). Then he gives the reason, saying, it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion, that is, be overcome by concupiscence.”
Martin Luther (1483–1546). Luther stands out for his vocal opposition to life-long celibacy. He argued that becoming a Christian does not mean we cease to be human beings with bodily functions, including a procreative drive. “Much as chastity is praised, and no matter how noble a gift it is, nevertheless necessity prevails so that few can attain it, for they cannot control themselves.” He also considered human sexuality to be fallen and “therefore because of this very disease, marriage is a necessity for him and it is not in his power to get along without it. For his flesh rages, burns and fructifies just like that of any other man, unless he helps and controls it with the proper medicine which is marriage.”[7]
John Calvin (1509–1564). Like interpreters before him, Calvin understood 1 Cor 7:9 to mean Paul says celibacy is not feasible for all. Jesus’s words were also interpreted this way. “Paul here expressly declares, that everyone has not a free choice in this matter [of celibacy], because virginity is a special gift, that is not conferred upon all indiscriminately. Nor does he teach any other doctrine than what Christ himself does, when he says, that ‘all men are not capable of receiving this saying’ (Matthew 19:11). Paul, therefore, is here an interpreter of our Lord’s words, when he says that this power has not been given to all—that of living without marriage.”
Calvin denounces those who make vows of life-time celibacy arguing that they are ignoring the instructions of Paul and even Christ himself. He concludes, “Virginity, I acknowledge, is an excellent gift; but keep it in view, that it is a gift. Learn, besides, from the mouth of Christ and of Paul, that it is not common to all, but is given only to a few. Guard, accordingly, against rashly devoting what is not in your own power, and what you will not obtain as a gift, if forgetful of your calling you aspire beyond your limits.”[8]
Puritan William Gouge (1578–1653). While Puritans have a reputation for being prudes, they did not shy away from recognizing human need for sexual relations (albeit in belief that sexual desire is the result of the fall). “No sinne is more hereditary [than sexual passion] . . . Of all the children of Adam that ever were, not one to a million of those that have come to ripenesse of yeares have beene true Eunuches [i.e. celibate] all their life time.”[9]
Westminster Larger Catechism (1647). The Reformation’s perspective on celibacy followed in the steps of a long, pre-existing tradition holding that life-long abstinence is not possible for everyone. But many Protestants went a step further to say that any person who makes a vow of celibacy is not only foolish, but also sinning against God. In fact, merely delaying marriage is deemed grievous. The Presbyterians declared, “What are the sins forbidden in the seventh commandment? . . . [E]ntangling vows of single life [Matt 19:10-11], undue delay of marriage [Cor 7:7-9; Gen 38:26].”[10]
Mother Mary Francis, PCC (1921–2006). What about views on celibacy today? Even Catholics who esteem celibacy, far more than Protestants, recognize human limitations. Mother Mary Francis emphasizes the importance of careful selection for those interested in joining a religious order, which requires a vow of celibacy: “‘An outstanding gift of grace’ is Vatican II’s description of the chastity that religious profess (PC, no. 12) . . . When the ‘outstanding gift of grace’ that is religious chastity has not been given by God, there are certainly going to be multiple problems for the one who professes celibacy.” She writes that such a vow requires “a force beyond and above nature” and that only those who show evidence of receiving this supernatural force or ‘outstanding gift of grace’ should be admitted to a religious order.[11]
Focus on the Family’s Boundless magazine (2009). Conservative evangelicals are also on record denying the possibility of life-long celibacy for everyone who attempts it. In fact, early marriage is often encouraged as a remedy: “God designed most of us to get married. . . at a certain point it becomes spiritually dangerous and even unhealthy to deny sexual relations. . . Just because our culture seems to think it’s fine to wait until you’re nearly 30 years old to take this step doesn’t mean you should ignore what you know is obvious: God designed you for sexual relations; God limits all sexual activity to marriage; and if you’re finding it difficult to control yourself sexually, He gives clear advice: Find somebody to marry.”[12]
Mark Regnerus (1971– ). Mark Regnerus, a Christian sociologist, wrote the following for the evangelical magazine Christianity Today: “I am suggesting that when people wait until their mid-to-late 20s to marry, it is unreasonable to expect them to refrain from sex. It’s battling our Creator’s reproductive designs.”[13]
Albert Mohler (1959– ). Albert Mohler, a prominent conservative evangelical leader and president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary has promoted early marriage to protect against promiscuity: “The vast majority of Christians who have gone before us would surely be shocked by the very need for a case to be made for Christian adults to marry . . . Our bodies are not evolutionary accidents, and God reveals his intention for humanity through the gifts of sexual maturation, fertility, and sexual desire. As men and women, we are made for marriage.”[14]
[1] A thorough discussion of celibacy and feasibility can be found in chapter 6 of Karen R. Keen, Scripture, Ethics, and the Possibility of Same-Sex Relationships (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2018).
[2] Ambrose, Concerning Virgins 1.5.23 in Some of the Principle Works of St. Ambrose, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, vol. 10, ed. Philip Schaff and Henry Wace, trans. H. de Romestin, et al. (Oxford: J. Parker & Co., 1896), 367.
[3] Ambrose, Concerning Virgins 1.7.35. Translation in Ariel Bybee Laughton, “Virginity Discourse and Ascetic Politics in the Writings of Ambrose of Milan” (Ph.D. Diss., Duke University, 2010), 90.
[4] John Chrysostom, The Homilies of S. John Chrysostom, Archbishop of Constantinople, on the First Epistle of St. Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians, trans. John Henry Parker (London: F. and J. Rivington, 1854), 248.
[5] Augustine, On the Good of Marriage 5-6 in St. Augustin: On the Holy Trinity, Doctrinal Treatises, Moral Treatises, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series, vol. 3, ed. Philip Schaff, trans. C. L. Cornish (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature, 1887), 401.
[6] For Thomas Aquinas’s discussion and the two quotes in this section, see Commentary on the Letters of St. Paul to the Corinthians, no. 332–335, trans. Fabian Larcher (Emmaus Academic, 2012).
[7] Martin Luther, “Commentary on 1 Corinthians 7” in Commentaries on 1 Corinthians 7, 1 Corinthians 15, Lectures on 1 Timothy, Luther’s Works 28, ed. Edward Sittler (St. Louis: Concordia, 1973), 25–31.
[8] Both quotes are from John Calvin, Commentary on Corinthians, https://ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom39/calcom39
[9] William Gouge, Of Domesticall Duties (London: John Haviland, 1622), 210.
[10] Westminster Larger Catechism, Q. 139.
[11] See chapter 5 in Mother Mary Francis, Chastity, Poverty, and Obedience: Recovering the Vision for the Renewal of Religious Life (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2007).
[12] Gary Thomas, “Marry Sooner Rather Than Later,” Boundless, March 13, 2009, https://www.boundless.org/relationships/marry-sooner-rather-than-later/
[13] Mark Regnerus, “The Case for Early Marriage,” Christianity Today, July 31, 2009, https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2009/august/16.22.html. Emphasis in the original.
[14] Albert Mohler, “The Case for (Early) Marriage,” Albert Mohler, August 3, 2009, https://albertmohler.com/2009/08/03/the-case-for-early-marriage/.