Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Does masturbation remove virginity?  (Read 5482 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Änσnymσus

  • Guest
Does masturbation remove virginity?
« on: May 16, 2015, 09:00:21 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • What is the Church's teaching on this?

    I'm interested in the answer for both men and women. I know that the world would answer no, but the Church may have a different standard.


    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Does masturbation remove virginity?
    « Reply #1 on: May 18, 2015, 08:04:42 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: [i
    Catholic Encyclopedia[/i], "Virginity"]Morally, virginity signifies the reverence for bodily integrity which is suggested by a virtuous motive. Thus understood, it is common to both sexes, and may exist in a women even after bodily violation committed upon her against her will. Physically, it implies a bodily integrity, visible evidence of which exists only in women. The Catholic Faith teaches us that God miraculously preserved this bodily integrity, in the Blessed Virgin Mary, even during and after her childbirth (see Paul IV, "cuм quorundam", 7 August, 1555). There are two elements in virginity: the material element, that is to say, the absence, in the past and in the present, of all complete and voluntary delectation, whether from lust or from the lawful use of marriage; and the formal element, that is the firm resolution to abstain forever from sɛҳuąƖ pleasure. It is to be remarked, on the one hand, that material virginity is not destroyed by every sin against the sixth or ninth commandment, and on the other hand that the resolution of virginity extends to more than the mere preservation of bodily integrity, for if it were restricted to material virginity, the resolution, at least outside the married state, might coexist with vicious desires, and could not then be virtuous.

    It has been sometimes asked whether there is a special virtue of virginity; and in spite of the affirmative answer of some authors, and of the text of St. Thomas, II-II:152:3, the statement of which cannot be taken literally, the question must be answered in the negative. Formally, virginity is but the purpose of perpetually preserving perfect chastity in one who abstains from sɛҳuąƖ pleasure. Ordinarily this purpose is inspired by a virtue superior to that of chastity; the motive may be religious or apostolic. Then the superior virtues of charity or religion will ennoble this purpose and communicate to it their own beauty; but we shall not find in it any splendour or merit of another virtue. The resolution of virginity is generally offered to God under the form of a vow. The counsel of virginity is expressly given in the New Testament; first in Matthew 19:11-12, where Christ, after reminding His disciples that besides those who are unfit for marriage by nature, or by reason of a mutilation inflicted by others, there are others who have made the same sacrifice for the kingdom of heaven, recommends them to imitate these. "He that can take, let him take it." Tradition has always understood this text in the sense of a profession of perpetual continence. St. Paul again, speaking (1 Corinthians 7:25-40) as a faithful preacher of the doctrine of the Lord (tamquam misericordiam consecutus a Domino, ut sim fidelis), formally declares that marriage is permissible, but that it would be better to follow his counsel and remain single; and he gives the reasons; besides the considerations arising from the circuмstances of his time, he gives this general reason, that the married man "is solicitous for the things of the world, how he may please his wife: and he is divided"; whereas he that is without a wife directs all his care to his own bodily and spiritual sanctification, and is at liberty to devote himself to prayer.

    The Church, following this teaching of St. Paul, has always considered the state of virginity or celibacy preferable in itself to the state of marriage, and the Council of Trent (Sess. XXIV, Can. 10) pronounces an anathema against the opposite doctrine. Some heretics of the sixteenth century understood Christ's words, "for the kingdom of heaven", in the text above quoted from St. Matthew, as applying to the preaching of the Gospel; but the context, especially verse 14, in which "the kingdom of heaven" clearly means eternal life, and the passage quoted from St. Paul sufficiently refute that interpretation. Reason confirms the teaching of Holy Scripture. The state of virginity means a signal victory over the lower appetites, and an emancipation from worldly and earthly cares, which gives a man liberty to devote himself to the service of God. Although a person who is a virgin may fail to correspond to the sublime graces of his or her state, and may be inferior in merit to a married person, yet experience bears witness to the marvellous spiritual fruit produced by the example of those men and women who emulate the purity of the angels.

    This perfect integrity of body, enhanced by a purpose of perpetual chastity, produces a special likeness to Christ, and creates a title to one of the three "aureolæ", which theologians mention. According to the teaching of St. Thomas (Supplement, 96) these "aureolæ" are particular rewards added to the essential happiness of eternity, and are like so many laurel wreaths, crowning three conspicuous victories, and three special points of resemblance to Christ: the victory over the flesh in virginity, the victory over the world in martyrdom, and the victory over the devil in the preaching of the truth. The text of St. John (Revelation 14:1-5) is often understood of virgins, and the canticle which they alone may sing before the throne denotes the "aureola" which is given to them alone. It is most probable that the words in the fourth verse, "These are they who were not defiled with women: for they are virgins", are really spoken of virgins, though there are also other interpretations; perhaps, those who "were purchased from among men, the firstfruits to God and to the Lamb: And in their mouth there was found no lie: (loc. cit., 4, 5) are the martyrs; they are declared to be without spot, as in an earlier chapter (vii, 14); they are said to "have washed their robes, and have made them white in the blood of the Lamb".

    In the article NUNS it is shown how Christian virgins have been one of the glories of the Church since the first ages, and how very ancient is the profession of virginity. Under RELIGIOUS LIFE is treated the difficulty of proving the strict obligation of perseverance before the fifth century, when we meet with the letter of Innocent V (404) to Vitricius (chapters xiii, xiv; cf. P.L., XX, 478 sqq.). Even at an earlier period still, the bishop presided at the clothing, and the consecration of virgins became a sacramental rite, in which the prayers and benedictions of the Church were added to the prayers and merits of those who presented themselves, in order to obtain for them the grace of fidelity in their sublime profession. In the fourth century no age was fixed for the consecration; virgins offered themselves quite young, at ten or twelve years of age. As there were children offered by their parents to the monastic life, so also there were children vowed to virginity before their birth, or very shortly after. Subsequently the law was passed which forbade consecration before the age of twenty-five years.

    The ceremony prescribed in the Roman Pontifical is very solemn, and follows, step by step, that of an ordination. It is reserved to the bishop, and can never be repeated. The days fixed for the solemnity were at first the Epiphany, Easter week, and the feasts of the Apostles. The third Council of the Lateran gave permission to consecrate virgins on all Sundays, and custom sometimes extended the permission (C. Subdiaconos, 1, De temp. ordinat., 1, 10). The ceremony takes place during Mass; the archpriest certifies the worthiness of the candidates, as he does that of the deacons. After the introductory hymns, the pontiff first asks them all together if they are resolved to persevere in their purpose of holy virginity; they answer: "Volumus" (we are). Then he asks each on severally: "Dost thou promise to preserve perpetual virginity"? and when she answers, "I do promise", the pontiff says, "Deo gratias". The litany of the saints is then sung, with a double invocation on behalf of the virgins present: "Ut præsentes ancillas benedicere ... sanctificare digneris" ("That though wouldst vouchsafe to bless and sanctify thy handmaidens here present"). It is to be remarked that the third invocation, "et consecrare digneris" ("That Thou wouldst vouchsafe to consecrate them"), which is added for major orders, is omitted here. The hymn "Veni Creator" follows, after which the pontiff blesses the habits, which the virgins put on. He then blesses the veil, the ring, and the crown. After the singing of a very beautiful preface, the bishop gives three articles to the virgins with the formulæ used in ordinations, and the ceremony ends with a benediction, some prayers, and a long anathema directed against any persons who attempt to seduce the virgins from their holy profession. Sometimes after the Mass, the bishop gave them, as also to the deaconesses, the Book of Hours, to recite the Office.

    From the fourth century the virgins wore a modest dress of dark colour; they were required to devote themselves to prayer (the canonical hours), manual labour, and an ascetic life. After the eighth century, as enclosure became the general law for persons consecrated to God, the reason for this special consecration of persons, already protected by the walls of the monastery and by their religious profession, ceased to exist. Secret faults committed before or even after admission to the monastery led to questions which were very delicate to decide, and which became the subject of controversy. Was one who had lost her virginity to make the fact known at the price of her reputation? Was it enough to present herself as a virgin in order to be able to receive consecration? (See for example "Theol. moralis Salmaticensium", Q. xvi de 6 et 9 præcepto, i, n. 75; or Lessius, De justitia", etc., IV, ii, dub. 16.) The ceremony became more and more rare, though examples were found still in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries; but it was not practiced in the Mendicant orders. Saint Antoninus knew it in the fifteenth century; while St. Charles Borromeo in vain tried to revive it in the sixteenth. The abbess alone received and still receives a solemn benediction.

    Virginity is irreparably lost by sɛҳuąƖ pleasure, voluntarily and completely experienced. "I tell you without hesitation", writes St. Jerome in his twenty-second Epistle to St. Eustochium, n. 5 (P.L., XXII, 397) "that though God is almighty, He cannot restore a virginity that has been lost." A failure in the resolution, or even incomplete faults, leave room for efficacious repentance, which restores virtue and the right to the aureola. Formerly virginity was required as a condition for entrance into some monasteries; at the present day, in most congregations, a pontifical dispensation is necessary for the reception of persons who have been married (the Order of the Visitation however is formally open to widows); but bodily integrity is no longer required. If the candidate's reputation is intact, the doors of monasteries are open to a generous repentance as to a generous innocence. (See NUNS; RELIGIOUS LIFE; VOWS; RELIGIOUS VEIL.)


    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Does masturbation remove virginity?
    « Reply #2 on: May 18, 2015, 08:07:03 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: [i
    Summa Theologica[/i], Secunda Secundæ Partis, Question 152. Virginity]Article 1. Whether virginity consists in integrity of the flesh?

    Objection 1. It would seem that virginity does not consist in integrity of the flesh. For Augustine says (De Nup. et Concup.) [The quotation is from De Sancta Virgin. xiii] that "virginity is the continual meditation on incorruption in a corruptible flesh." But meditation does not concern the flesh. Therefore virginity is not situated in the flesh.

    Objection 2. Further, virginity denotes a kind of purity. Now Augustine says (De Civ. Dei i, 18) that "purity dwells in the soul." Therefore virginity is not incorruption of the flesh.

    Objection 3. Further, the integrity of the flesh would seem to consist in the seal of virginal purity. Yet sometimes the seal is broken without loss of virginity. For Augustine says (De Civ. Dei i, 18) that "those organs may be injured through being wounded by mischance. Physicians, too, sometimes do for the sake of health that which makes one shudder to see: and a midwife has been known to destroy by touch the proof of virginity that she sought." And he adds: "Nobody, I think, would be so foolish as to deem this maiden to have forfeited even bodily sanctity, though she lost the integrity of that organ." Therefore virginity does not consist in incorruption of the flesh.

    Objection 4. Further, corruption of the flesh consists chiefly in resolution of the semen: and this may take place without copulation, whether one be asleep or awake. Yet seemingly virginity is not lost without copulation: for Augustine says (De Virgin. xiii) that "virginal integrity and holy continency that refrains from all sɛҳuąƖ intercourse is the portion of angels." Therefore virginity does not consist in incorruption of the flesh.

    On the contrary, Augustine says (De Virgin. viii) that "virginity is continence whereby integrity of the flesh is vowed, consecrated and observed in honor of the Creator of both soul and flesh."

    I answer that, Virginity takes its name apparently from "viror" [freshness], and just as a thing is described as fresh and retaining its freshness, so long as it is not parched by excessive heat, so too, virginity denotes that the person possessed thereof is unseared by the heat of concupiscence which is experienced in achieving the greatest bodily pleasure which is that of sɛҳuąƖ intercourse. Hence, Ambrose says (De Virgin. i, 5) that "virginal chastity is integrity free of pollution."

    Now venereal pleasures offer three points for consideration. The first is on the part of the body, viz. the violation of the seal of virginity. The second is the link between that which concerns the soul and that which concerns the body, and this is the resolution of the semen, causing sensible pleasure. The third is entirely on the part of the soul, namely the purpose of attaining this pleasure. Of these three the first is accidental to the moral act, which as such must be considered in reference to the soul. The second stands in the relation of matter to the moral act, since the sensible passions are the matters of moral acts. But the third stands in the position of form and complement, because the essence of morality is perfected in that which concerns the reason. Since then virginity consists in freedom from the aforesaid corruption, it follows that the integrity of the bodily organ is accidental to virginity; while freedom from pleasure in resolution of the semen is related thereto materially; and the purpose of perpetually abstaining from this pleasure is the formal and completive element in virginity.

    Reply to Objection 1. This definition of Augustine's expresses directly that which is formal in virginity. For "meditation" denotes reason's purpose; and the addition "perpetual" does not imply that a virgin must always retain this meditation actually, but that she should bear in mind the purpose of always persevering therein. The material element is expressed indirectly by the words "on incorruption in a corruptible body." This is added to show the difficulty of virginity: for if the flesh were incorruptible, it would not be difficult to maintain a perpetual meditation on incorruption.

    Reply to Objection 2. It is true that purity, as to its essence, is in the soul; but as to its matter, it is in the body: and it is the same with virginity. Wherefore Augustine says (De Virgin. viii) that "although virginity resides in the flesh," and for this reason is a bodily quality, "yet it is a spiritual thing, which a holy continency fosters and preserves."

    Reply to Objection 3. As stated above, the integrity of a bodily organ is accidental to virginity, in so far as a person, through purposely abstaining from venereal pleasure, retains the integrity of a bodily organ. Hence if the organ lose its integrity by chance in some other way, this is no more prejudicial to virginity than being deprived of a hand or foot.

    Reply to Objection 4. Pleasure resulting from resolution of semen may arise in two ways. If this be the result of the mind's purpose, it destroys virginity, whether copulation takes place or not. Augustine, however, mentions copulation, because such like resolution is the ordinary and natural result thereof. On another way this may happen beside the purpose of the mind, either during sleep, or through violence and without the mind's consent, although the flesh derives pleasure from it, or again through weakness of nature, as in the case of those who are subject to a flow of semen. On such cases virginity is not forfeit, because such like pollution is not the result of impurity which excludes virginity.

    Article 2. Whether virginity is unlawful?

    Objection 1. It would seem that virginity is unlawful. For whatever is contrary to a precept of the natural law is unlawful. Now just as the words of Genesis 2:16, "Of every tree" that is in "paradise, thou shalt eat," indicate a precept of the natural law, in reference to the preservation of the individual, so also the words of Genesis 1:28, "Increase and multiply, and fill the earth," express a precept of the natural law, in reference to the preservation of the species. Therefore just as it would be a sin to abstain from all food, as this would be to act counter to the good of the individual, so too it is a sin to abstain altogether from the act of procreation, for this is to act against the good of the species.

    Objection 2. Further, whatever declines from the mean of virtue is apparently sinful. Now virginity declines from the mean of virtue, since it abstains from all venereal pleasures: for the Philosopher says (Ethic. ii, 2), that "he who revels in every pleasure, and abstains from not even one, is intemperate: but he who refrains from all is loutish and insensible." Therefore virginity is something sinful.

    Objection 3. Further, punishment is not due save for a vice. Now in olden times those were punished who led a celibate life, as Valerius Maximus asserts [Dict. Fact. Mem. ii, 9. Hence according to Augustine (De Vera Relig. iii) Plato "is said to have sacrificed to nature, in order that he might atone for his perpetual continency as though it were a sin." Therefore virginity is a sin.

    On the contrary, No sin is a matter of direct counsel. But virginity is a matter of direct counsel: for it is written (1 Corinthians 7:25): "Concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord: but I give counsel." Therefore virginity is not an unlawful thing.

    I answer that, In human acts, those are sinful which are against right reason. Now right reason requires that things directed to an end should be used in a measure proportionate to that end. Again, man's good is threefold as stated in Ethic. i, 8; one consisting in external things, for instance riches; another, consisting in bodily goods; the third, consisting in the goods of the soul among which the goods of the contemplative life take precedence of the goods of the active life, as the Philosopher shows (Ethic. x, 7), and as our Lord declared (Luke 10:42), "Mary hath chosen the better part." Of these goods those that are external are directed to those which belong to the body, and those which belong to the body are directed to those which belong to the soul; and furthermore those which belong to the active life are directed to those which belong to the life of contemplation. Accordingly, right reason dictates that one use external goods in a measure proportionate to the body, and in like manner as regards the rest. Wherefore if a man refrain from possessing certain things (which otherwise it were good for him to possess), for the sake of his body's good, or of the contemplation of truth, this is not sinful, but in accord with right reason. On like manner if a man abstain from bodily pleasures, in order more freely to give himself to the contemplation of truth, this is in accordance with the rectitude of reason. Now holy virginity refrains from all venereal pleasure in order more freely to have leisure for Divine contemplation: for the Apostle says (1 Corinthians 7:34): "The unmarried woman and the virgin thinketh on the things of the Lord: that she may be holy in both body and in spirit. But she that is married thinketh on the things of the world, how she may please her husband." Therefore it follows that virginity instead of being sinful is worthy of praise.

    Reply to Objection 1. A precept implies a duty, as stated above (Question 122, Article 1). Now there are two kinds of duty. There is the duty that has to be fulfilled by one person; and a duty of this kind cannot be set aside without sin. The other duty has to be fulfilled by the multitude, and the fulfilment of this kind of duty is not binding on each one of the multitude. For the multitude has many obligations which cannot be discharged by the individual; but are fulfilled by one person doing this, and another doing that. Accordingly the precept of natural law which binds man to eat must needs be fulfilled by each individual, otherwise the individual cannot be sustained. On the other hand, the precept of procreation regards the whole multitude of men, which needs not only to multiply in body, but also to advance spiritually. Wherefore sufficient provision is made for the human multitude, if some betake themselves to carnal procreation, while others abstaining from this betake themselves to the contemplation of Divine things, for the beauty and welfare of the whole human race. Thus too in an army, some take sentry duty, others are standard-bearers, and others fight with the sword: yet all these things are necessary for the multitude, although they cannot be done by one person.

    Reply to Objection 2. The person who, beside the dictate of right reason, abstains from all pleasures through aversion, as it were, for pleasure as such, is insensible as a country lout. But a virgin does not refrain from every pleasure, but only from that which is venereal: and abstains therefrom according to right reason, as stated above. Now the mean of virtue is fixed with reference, not to quantity but to right reason, as stated in Ethic. ii, 6: wherefore it is said of the magnanimous (Ethic. iv, 3) that "in point of quantity he goes to the extreme, but in point of becomingness he follows the mean."

    Reply to Objection 3. Laws are framed according to what occurs more frequently. Now it seldom happened in olden times that anyone refrained from all venereal pleasure through love of the contemplation of truth: as Plato alone is related to have done. Hence it was not through thinking this a sin, that he offered sacrifice, but "because he yielded to the false opinion of his fellow countrymen," as Augustine remarks (De Vera Relig. iii).

    Article 3. Whether virginity is a virtue?

    Objection 1. It would seem that virginity is not a virtue. For "no virtue is in us by nature," as the Philosopher says (Ethic. ii, 1). Now virginity is in us by nature, since all are virgins when born. Therefore virginity is not a virtue.

    Objection 2. Further, whoever has one virtue has all virtues, as stated above (I-II, 65, 1). Yet some have other virtues without having virginity: else, since none can go to the heavenly kingdom without virtue, no one could go there without virginity, which would involve the condemnation of marriage. Therefore virginity is not a virtue.

    Objection 3. Further, every virtue is recovered by penance. But virginity is not recovered by penance: wherefore Jerome says [Ep. xxii ad Eustoch.]: "Other things God can do, but He cannot restore the virgin after her downfall." Therefore seemingly virginity is not a virtue.

    Objection 4. Further, no virtue is lost without sin. Yet virginity is lost without sin, namely by marriage. Therefore virginity is not a virtue.

    Objection 5. Further, virginity is condivided with widowhood and conjugal purity. But neither of these is a virtue. Therefore virginity is not a virtue.

    On the contrary, Ambrose says (De Virgin. i, 3): "Love of virginity moves us to say something about virginity, lest by passing it over we should seem to cast a slight on what is a virtue of high degree."

    I answer that, As stated above (Article 1), the formal and completive element in virginity is the purpose of abstaining from venereal pleasure, which purpose is rendered praiseworthy by its end, in so far, to wit, as this is done in order to have leisure for Divine things: while the material element in virginity is integrity of the flesh free of all experience of venereal pleasure. Now it is manifest that where a good action has a special matter through having a special excellence, there is a special kind of virtue: for example, magnificence which is about great expenditure is for this reason a special virtue distinct from liberality, which is about all uses of money in general. Now to keep oneself free from the experience of venereal pleasure has an excellence of its own deserving of greater praise than keeping oneself free from inordinate venereal pleasure. Wherefore virginity is a special virtue being related to chastity as magnificence to liberality.

    Reply to Objection 1. Men have from their birth that which is material in virginity, namely integrity of the flesh and freedom from venereal experience. But they have not that which is formal in virginity, namely the purpose of safeguarding this integrity for God's sake, which purpose gives virginity its character of virtue. Hence Augustine says (De Virgin. xi): "Nor do we praise virgins for being virgins, but, because their virginity is consecrated to God by holy continency."

    Reply to Objection 2. Virtues are connected together by reason of that which is formal in them, namely charity, or by reason of prudence, as stated above (129, 3, ad 2), but not by reason of that which is material in them. For nothing hinders a virtuous man from providing the matter of one virtue, and not the matter of another virtue: thus a poor man has the matter of temperance, but not that of magnificence. It is in this way that one who has the other virtues lacks the matter of virginity, namely the aforesaid integrity of the flesh: nevertheless he can have that which is formal in virginity, his mind being so prepared that he has the purpose of safeguarding this same integrity of the flesh, should it be fitting for him to do so: even as a poor man may be so prepared in mind as to have the purpose of being magnificent in his expenditure, were he in a position to do so: or again as a prosperous man is so prepared in mind as to purpose bearing misfortune with equanimity: without which preparedness of the mind no man can be virtuous.

    Reply to Objection 3. Virtue can be recovered by penance as regards that which is formal in virtue, but not as to that which is material therein. For if a magnificent man has squandered all his wealth he does not recover his riches by repenting of his sin. On like manner a person who has lost virginity by sin, recovers by repenting, not the matter of virginity but the purpose of virginity.

    As regards the matter of virginity there is that which can be miraculously restored by God, namely the integrity of the organ, which we hold to be accidental to virginity: while there is something else which cannot be restored even by miracle, to wit, that one who has experienced venereal lust should cease to have had that experience. For God cannot make that which is done not to have been done, as stated in I, 25, 4.

    Reply to Objection 4. Virginity as a virtue denotes the purpose, confirmed by vow, of observing perpetual integrity. For Augustine says (De Virgin. viii) that "by virginity, integrity of the flesh is vowed, consecrated and observed in honor of the Creator of both soul and flesh." Hence virginity, as a virtue, is never lost without sin.

    Reply to Objection 5. Conjugal chastity is deserving of praise merely because it abstains from unlawful pleasures: hence no excellence attaches to it above that of chastity in general. Widowhood, however, adds something to chastity in general; but it does not attain to that which is perfect in this matter, namely to entire freedom from venereal pleasure; virginity alone achieves this. Wherefore virginity alone is accounted a virtue above chastity, even as magnificence is reckoned above liberality.

    Article 4. Whether virginity is more excellent than marriage?

    Objection 1. It would seem that virginity is not more excellent than marriage. For Augustine says (De Bono Conjug. xxi): "Continence was equally meritorious in John who remained unmarried and Abraham who begot children." Now a greater virtue has greater merit. Therefore virginity is not a greater virtue than conjugal chastity.

    Objection 2. Further, the praise accorded a virtuous man depends on his virtue. If, then, virginity were preferable to conjugal continence, it would seem to follow that every virgin is to be praised more than any married woman. But this is untrue. Therefore virginity is not preferable to marriage.

    Objection 3. Further, the common good takes precedence of the private good, according to the Philosopher (Ethic. i, 2). Now marriage is directed to the common good: for Augustine says (De Bono Conjug. xvi): "What food is to a man's wellbeing, such is sɛҳuąƖ intercourse to the welfare of the human race." On the other hand, virginity is ordered to the individual good, namely in order to avoid what the Apostle calls the "tribulation of the flesh," to which married people are subject (1 Corinthians 7:28). Therefore virginity is not greater than conjugal continence.

    On the contrary, Augustine says (De Virgin. xix): "Both solid reason and the authority of Holy Writ show that neither is marriage sinful, nor is it to be equaled to the good of virginal continence or even to that of widowhood."

    I answer that, According to Jerome (Contra Jovin. i) the error of Jovinian consisted in holding virginity not to be preferable to marriage. This error is refuted above all by the example of Christ Who both chose a virgin for His mother, and remained Himself a virgin, and by the teaching of the Apostle who (1 Corinthians 7) counsels virginity as the greater good. It is also refuted by reason, both because a Divine good takes precedence of a human good, and because the good of the soul is preferable to the good of the body, and again because the good of the contemplative life is better than that of the active life. Now virginity is directed to the good of the soul in respect of the contemplative life, which consists in thinking "on the things of God" [Vulgate: 'the Lord'], whereas marriage is directed to the good of the body, namely the bodily increase of the human race, and belongs to the active life, since the man and woman who embrace the married life have to think "on the things of the world," as the Apostle says (1 Corinthians 7:34). Without doubt therefore virginity is preferable to conjugal continence.

    Reply to Objection 1. Merit is measured not only by the kind of action, but still more by the mind of the agent. Now Abraham had a mind so disposed, that he was prepared to observe virginity, if it were in keeping with the times for him to do so. Wherefore in him conjugal continence was equally meritorious with the virginal continence of John, as regards the essential reward, but not as regards the accidental reward. Hence Augustine says (De Bono Conjug. xxi) that both "the celibacy of John and the marriage of Abraham fought Christ's battle in keeping with the difference of the times: but John was continent even in deed, whereas Abraham was continent only in habit."

    Reply to Objection 2. 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. Hence Augustine (De Bono Conjug. xxii) charges the virgin to say: "I am no better than Abraham, although the chastity of celibacy is better than the chastity of marriage." Further on he gives the reason for this: "For what I do now, he would have done better, if it were fitting for him to do it then; and what they did I would even do now if it behooved me now to do it." Secondly, because perhaps the person who is not a virgin has some more excellent virtue. Wherefore Augustine says (De Virgin. xliv): "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 chalice of the Lord?"

    Reply to Objection 3. The common good takes precedence of the private good, if it be of the same genus: but it may be that the private good is better generically. It is thus that the virginity that is consecrated to God is preferable to carnal fruitfulness. Hence Augustine says (De Virgin. ix): "It must be confessed that the fruitfulness of the flesh, even of those women who in these times seek naught else from marriage but children in order to make them servants of Christ, cannot compensate for lost virginity."

    Article 5. Whether virginity is the greatest of virtues?

    Objection 1. It would seem that virginity is the greatest of virtues. For Cyprian says (De Virgin. [De Habitu Virg.]): "We address ourselves now to the virgins. Sublime is their glory, but no less exalted is their vocation. They are a flower of the Church's sowing, the pride and ornament of spiritual grace, the most honored portion of Christ's flock."

    Objection 2. Further, a greater reward is due to the greater virtue. Now the greatest reward is due to virginity, namely the hundredfold fruit, according to a gloss on Matthew 13:23. Therefore virginity is the greatest of the virtues.

    Objection 3. Further, the more a virtue conforms us to Christ, the greater it is. Now virginity above all conforms us to Christ; for it is declared in the Apocalypse 14:4 that virgins "follow the Lamb whithersoever He goeth," and (Apocalypse 14:3) that they sing "a new canticle," which "no" other "man" could say. Therefore virginity is the greatest of the virtues.

    On the contrary, Augustine says (De Virgin. xlvi): "No one, methinks, would dare prefer virginity to martyrdom," and (De Virgin. xlv): "The authority of the Church informs the faithful in no uncertain manner, so that they know in what place the martyrs and the holy virgins who have departed this life are commemorated in the Sacrament of the Altar." By this we are given to understand that martyrdom, and also the monastic state, are preferable to virginity.

    I answer that, A thing may excel all others in two ways. First, in some particular genus: and thus virginity is most excellent, namely in the genus of chastity, since it surpasses the chastity both of widowhood and of marriage. And because comeliness is ascribed to chastity antonomastically, it follows that surpassing beauty is ascribed to chastity. Wherefore Ambrose says (De Virgin. i, 7): "Can anyone esteem any beauty greater than a virgin's, since she is beloved of her King, approved by her Judge, dedicated to her Lord, consecrated to her God?" Secondly, a thing may be most excellent simply, and in this way virginity is not the most excellent of the virtues. Because the end always excels that which is directed to the end; and the more effectively a thing is directed to the end, the better it is. Now the end which renders virginity praiseworthy is that one may have leisure for Divine things, as stated above (Article 4). Wherefore the theological virtues as well as the virtue of religion, the acts of which consist in being occupied about Divine things, are preferable to virginity. Moreover, martyrs work more mightily in order to cleave to God--since for this end they hold their own life in contempt; and those who dwell in monasteries--since for this end they give up their own will and all that they may possess--than virgins who renounce venereal pleasure for that same purpose. Therefore virginity is not simply the greatest of virtues.

    Reply to Objection 1. Virgins are "the more honored portion of Christ's flock," and "their glory more sublime" in comparison with widows and married women.

    Reply to Objection 2. The hundredfold fruit is ascribed to virginity, according to Jerome [Ep. cxxiii ad Ageruch.], on account of its superiority to widowhood, to which the sixtyfold fruit is ascribed, and to marriage, to which is ascribed the thirtyfold fruit. But according to Augustine (De QQ. Evang. i, 9), "the hundredfold fruit is given to martyrs, the sixtyfold to virgins, and the thirtyfold to married persons." Wherefore it does not follow that virginity is simply the greatest of virtues, but only in comparison with other degrees of chastity.

    Reply to Objection 3. Virgins "follow the Lamb whithersoever He goeth," because they imitate Christ, by integrity not only of the mind but also of the flesh, as Augustine says (De Virgin. xxvii). Wherefore they follow the Lamb in more ways, but this does not imply that they follow more closely, because other virtues make us cleave to God more closely by imitation of the mind. The "new hymn" which virgins alone sing, is their joy at having preserved integrity of the flesh.

    Offline poche

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 16730
    • Reputation: +1218/-4688
    • Gender: Male
    Does masturbation remove virginity?
    « Reply #3 on: May 18, 2015, 11:18:08 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • This is why I think it is best to focus on the virtue of chastity. There are many who appear virtuous from lack of opportunity to do wrong. What good is your virginity if you sin against the virtue of chastity in that way?
    There may well be others who are not virgins whose virtue is greater that he who willingly sins against chastity.

    Offline Geremia

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4120
    • Reputation: +1259/-259
    • Gender: Male
      • St. Isidore e-book library
    Re: Does masturbation remove virginity?
    « Reply #4 on: May 26, 2019, 08:00:31 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Our Lady, responding to what seemed to her something that would violate her vow of virginity, said: "I know not man." (Luke 1:34).
    It seems carnally knowing the opposite sex is requisite for not being a virgin.
    St. Isidore e-book library: https://isidore.co/calibre


    Offline Geremia

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4120
    • Reputation: +1259/-259
    • Gender: Male
      • St. Isidore e-book library
    Re: Does masturbation remove virginity?
    « Reply #5 on: May 26, 2019, 08:30:13 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • It seems carnally knowing the opposite sex is requisite for not being a virgin.
    Actually, even this doesn't always take away virginity:
    Summa Theologica suppl. q. 96 a. 5 "Whether an aureole is due on account of virginity?" ad 4:
    Quote
    If a virgin is violated, she does not forfeit the aureole, provided she retain unfailingly the purpose of observing perpetual virginity, and nowise consent to the act. Nor does she forfeit virginity thereby; and be this said, whether she be violated for the faith, or for any other cause whatever. But if she suffer this for the faith, this will count to her for merit, and will be a kind of martyrdom: wherefore Lucy said: "If thou causest me to be violated against my will, my chastity will receive a double crown"*; not that she has two aureoles of virginity, but that she will receive a double reward, one for observing virginity, the other for the outrage she has suffered. Even supposing that one thus violated should conceive, she would not for that reason forfeit her virginity: nor would she be equal to Christ's mother, in whom there was integrity of the flesh together with integrity of the mind.
    [*Office of S. Lucy; lect. vi of Dominican Breviary, December 13th]
    St. Thomas even admits the possibility of pregnant virgins.
    St. Isidore e-book library: https://isidore.co/calibre

    Offline Geremia

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4120
    • Reputation: +1259/-259
    • Gender: Male
      • St. Isidore e-book library
    Re: Does masturbation remove virginity?
    « Reply #6 on: May 26, 2019, 08:40:33 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • What good is your virginity if you sin against the virtue of chastity in that way?
    Exactly. As St. Augustine wrote (De sancta virginitate, ii):
    Quote
    Neither do we praise in virgins the fact that they are virgins, but that, dedicated to God, they are virgins by virtue of continence filled with piety.
    Virginity only has value if it is dedicated to God.

    Continence in itself, strictly speaking, isn't a virtue.
    St. Isidore e-book library: https://isidore.co/calibre

    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Re: Does masturbation remove virginity?
    « Reply #7 on: May 27, 2019, 08:20:06 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Once again, Geremia is posting on his favorite topic, matters of sex. virginity, continence, chastity, fornication, birth control, masturbation, and so forth. Note that this thread was 4 years dead. He dug up an old thread looking for more material on his favorite topic and related topics.


    Online Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4187
    • Reputation: +2431/-557
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does masturbation remove virginity?
    « Reply #8 on: May 27, 2019, 11:27:48 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • This thread and threads like it, should not exist. With that said, If it’s allowed by the owner of the website, the owner should, at the very least, move it to the men’s section.
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Offline Geremia

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4120
    • Reputation: +1259/-259
    • Gender: Male
      • St. Isidore e-book library
    Re: Does masturbation remove virginity?
    « Reply #9 on: May 27, 2019, 03:49:27 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • He dug up an old thread looking for more material on his favorite topic and related topics.
    I stumbled upon while looking for threads that mention "aureoles".
    St. Isidore e-book library: https://isidore.co/calibre

    Offline Geremia

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4120
    • Reputation: +1259/-259
    • Gender: Male
      • St. Isidore e-book library
    Re: Does masturbation remove virginity?
    « Reply #10 on: May 27, 2019, 03:49:42 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • This thread and threads like it, should not exist. With that said, If it’s allowed by the owner of the website, the owner should, at the very least, move it to the men’s section.
    Why?
    St. Isidore e-book library: https://isidore.co/calibre


    Offline Geremia

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4120
    • Reputation: +1259/-259
    • Gender: Male
      • St. Isidore e-book library
    Re: Does masturbation remove virginity?
    « Reply #11 on: May 27, 2019, 03:52:20 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Once again, Geremia is posting on his favorite topic, matters of sex. virginity, continence, chastity, fornication, birth control, masturbation, and so forth.
    So? Is discussing these topics off-limits, "taboo"?
    St. Isidore e-book library: https://isidore.co/calibre

    Online Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4187
    • Reputation: +2431/-557
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Does masturbation remove virginity?
    « Reply #12 on: May 27, 2019, 06:03:40 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!1
  • Why?
    Because these things should be discussed with a priest in private or in the confessional. You don’t know that?
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Re: Does masturbation remove virginity?
    « Reply #13 on: May 28, 2019, 12:31:25 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Because these things should be discussed with a priest in private or in the confessional. You don’t know that?
    .
    It's a theological question, not a moral one. 

    Änσnymσus

    • Guest
    Re: Does masturbation remove virginity?
    « Reply #14 on: May 28, 2019, 04:51:21 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • It  is against the virtue of modesty to broach this subject wholesale, publicly - esp. using unsubtle titles, too much detail?  And not on a coed website.

    We live the crassness and boldness of the modern corrupted world much too easily.