Yet another about deacons. This would also concern priests in the Latin Church who, as married ministers in other churches, were received into the Roman Church and ordained.
A few days ago distinguished canonist Ed Peters posted on his fine blog an entry about CIC 1983 277, which concerns clerical “continence”.
I particularly liked his statment:
Canon 277 (and the immemorial tradition behind it) either means what I say it means, or it doesn’t.
The Catholic Encyclopedia defines “continence”:
Continence may be defined as abstinence from even the licit gratifications of marriage. It is a form of the virtue of temperance, though Aristotle did not accord it this high character since it involved a conflict with wrong desires–an element, in the mind of the philosopher, foreign to the content of a virtue in the strict sense. Continence, it is seen, has a more restricted significance than chastity, since the latter finds place in the condition of marriage. The abstinence we are discussing, then, belongs to the state of celibacy, though clearly the notion of this latter does not necessarily involve that of continence.
Prof. Peters has stirred up the ant hill, for sure.
I shall carefully watch the unfolding drama.