Respondeo dicendum quod nomen castitatis dupliciter accipitur. Uno modo, proprie. Et sic est quaedam specialis virtus, habens specialem materiam, scilicet concupiscentias delectabilium quae sunt in venereis. Alio modo nomen castitatis accipitur metaphorice. Sicut enim in corporis commixtione consistit delectatio venereorum, circa quam proprie est castitas et oppositum vitium, scilicet luxuria; ita etiam in quadam spirituali coniunctione mentis ad res aliquas consistit quaedam delectatio, circa quam est quaedam spiritualis castitas metaphorice dicta, vel etiam spiritualis fornicatio, similiter metaphorice dicta. Si enim mens hominis delectetur in spirituali coniunctione ad id cui debet coniungi, scilicet ad Deum; et abstinet se ne delectabiliter aliis coniungatur, contra debitum divini ordinis, dicetur castitas spiritualis, secundum illud II ad Cor. XI, despondi vos uni viro, virginem castam exhibere Christo. Si autem delectabiliter, contra debitum divini ordinis, coniungatur mens quibuscumque aliis rebus, dicetur fornicatio spiritualis, secundum illud Ierem. III, tu autem fornicata es cum amatoribus multis. Et hoc modo accipiendo castitatem, castitas est generalis virtus, quia per quamlibet virtutem retrahitur mens humana ne rebus illicitis delectabiliter coniungatur. Principaliter tamen ratio huius castitatis consistit in caritate et in aliis virtutibus theologicis, quibus mens hominis coniungitur Deo. I answer that, The word chastity is employed in two ways. First, properly; and thus it is a special virtue having a special matter, namely the concupiscences relating to venereal pleasures. Second, the word chastity is employed metaphorically: for just as a mingling of bodies conduces to venereal pleasure which is the proper matter of chastity and of lust its contrary vice, so too the spiritual union of the mind with certain things conduces to a pleasure which is the matter of a spiritual chastity metaphorically speaking, as well as of a spiritual fornication likewise metaphorically so called. For if the human mind delight in the spiritual union with that to which it behooves it to be united, namely God, and refrains from delighting in union with other things against the requirements of the order established by God, this may be called a spiritual chastity, according to 2 Cor. 11:2, I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ. If, on the other hand, the mind be united to any other things whatsoever, against the prescription of the Divine order, it will be called spiritual fornication, according to Jer. 3:1, But thou hast prostituted thyself to many lovers. Taking chastity in this sense, it is a general virtue, because every virtue withdraws the human mind from delighting in a union with unlawful things. Nevertheless, the essence of this chastity consists principally in charity and the other theological virtues, whereby the human mind is united to God. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod ratio illa procedit de castitate metaphorice dicta. Reply Obj. 1: This argument takes chastity in the metaphorical sense. Ad secundum dicendum quod, sicut supra dictum est, concupiscentia delectabilis maxime assimilatur puero, eo quod appetitus delectabilis est nobis connaturalis, et praecipue delectabilium secundum tactum, quae ordinantur ad conservationem naturae; et inde est quod, si nutriatur horum delectabilium concupiscentia per hoc quod ei consentiatur, maxime augebitur, sicut puer qui suae voluntati relinquitur. Et sic concupiscentia horum delectabilium maxime indiget castigari. Et ideo circa huiusmodi concupiscentias antonomastice dicitur castitas, sicut et fortitudo est circa ea in quibus maxime indigemus animi firmitate. Reply Obj. 2: As stated above (A. 1; Q. 142, A. 2), the concupiscence of that which gives pleasure is especially likened to a child, because the desire of pleasure is connatural to us, especially of pleasures of touch which are directed to the maintenance of nature. Hence it is that if the concupiscence of such pleasures be fostered by consenting to it, it will wax very strong, as in the case of a child left to his own will. Wherefore the concupiscence of these pleasures stands in very great need of being chastised: and consequently chastity is applied antonomastically to such like concupiscences, even as fortitude is about those matters wherein we stand in the greatest need of strength of mind. Ad tertium dicendum quod obiectio illa procedit de fornicatione spirituali metaphorice dicta, quae opponitur spirituali castitati, ut dictum est. Reply Obj. 3: This argument considers spiritual fornication metaphorically so called, which is opposed to spiritual chastity, as stated. Articulus 3 Article 3 Utrum castitas sit virtus distincta ab abstinentia Whether chastity is a distinct virtue from abstinence? Ad tertium sic proceditur. Videtur quod castitas non sit virtus distincta ab abstinentia. Quia circa materiam unius generis sufficit una virtus. Sed unius generis esse videntur quae pertinent ad unum sensum. Cum igitur delectatio ciborum, circa quam est abstinentia, et delectatio venereorum, circa quam est castitas, pertineant ad tactum, videtur quod castitas non sit alia virtus ab abstinentia. Objection 1: It would seem that chastity is not a distinct virtue from abstinence. Because where the matter is generically the same, one virtue suffices. Now it would seem that things pertaining to the same sense are of one genus. Therefore, since pleasures of the palate which are the matter of abstinence, and venereal pleasures which are the matter of chastity, pertain to the touch, it seems that chastity is not a distinct virtue from abstinence. Praeterea, philosophus, in III Ethic., omnia vitia intemperantiae assimilat puerilibus peccatis, quae castigatione indigent. Sed castitas nominatur a castigatione vitiorum oppositorum. Ergo, cum per abstinentiam cohibeantur quaedam vitia intemperantiae, videtur quod abstinentia sit castitas. Obj. 2: Further, the Philosopher (Ethic. iii, 12) likens all vices of intemperance to childish sins, which need chastising. Now chastity takes its name from chastisement of the contrary vices. Since then certain vices are bridled by abstinence, it seems that abstinence is chastity. Praeterea, delectationes aliorum sensuum pertinent ad temperantiam inquantum ordinantur ad delectationes tactus, circa quas est temperantia. Sed delectationes ciborum, circa quas est abstinentia, ordinantur ad delectationes venereorum, circa quas est castitas, unde Hieronymus dicit, venter et genitalia sibimetipsis vicina sunt, ut ex vicinitate membrorum confederatio intelligatur vitiorum. Ergo abstinentia et castitas non sunt virtutes ab invicem distinctae. Obj. 3: Further, the pleasures of the other senses are the concern of temperance insofar as they refer to pleasures of touch; which are the matter of temperance. Now pleasures of the palate, which are the matter of abstinence, are directed to venereal pleasures, which are the matter of chastity: wherefore Jerome says, commenting on Titus 1:7, Not given to wine, no striker, etc.: The belly and the organs of generation are neighbors, that the neighborhood of the organs may indicate their complicity in vice. Therefore abstinence and chastity are not distinct virtues. Sed contra est quod apostolus, II ad Cor. VI, connumerat castitatem ieiuniis, quae ad abstinentiam pertinent. On the contrary, The Apostle (2 Cor 6:5, 6) reckons chastity together with fastings which pertain to abstinence. Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut dictum est, temperantia proprie est circa concupiscentias delectationum tactus. Et ideo oportet ut ubi sunt diversae rationes delectationis, ibi sint diversae virtutes sub temperantia comprehensae. Delectationes autem proportionantur operationibus, quarum sunt perfectiones, ut dicitur X Ethic. Manifestum est autem quod alterius generis sunt operationes pertinentes ad usum ciborum, quibus natura individui conservatur; et operationes pertinentes ad usum venereorum, quibus conservatur natura speciei. Et ideo castitas, quae est circa delectationes venereorum, est virtus distincta ab abstinentia, quae est circa delectationes ciborum. I answer that, As stated above (Q. 141, A. 4), temperance is properly about the concupiscences of the pleasures of touch: so that where there are different kinds of pleasure, there are different virtues comprised under temperance. Now pleasures are proportionate to the actions whose perfections they are, as stated in Ethic. ix, 4, 5: and it is evident that actions connected with the use of food whereby the nature of the individual is maintained differ generically from actions connected with the use of matters venereal, whereby the nature of the species is preserved. Therefore chastity, which is about venereal pleasures, is a distinct virtue from abstinence, which is about pleasures of the palate. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod temperantia non consistit principaliter circa delectationes tactus quantum ad iudicium sensus de tangibilibus, quod est eiusdem rationis in omnibus, sed quantum ad ipsum usum tangibilium, ut dicitur in III Ethic. Est autem alia ratio utendi cibis et potibus, et venereis. Et ideo oportet esse diversas virtutes, licet sint unius sensus. Reply Obj. 1: Temperance is chiefly about pleasures of touch, not as regards the sense’s judgment concerning the objects of touch, which judgment is of uniform character concerning all such objects, but as regards the use itself of those objects, as stated in Ethic. iii, 10. Now the uses of meats, drinks, and venereal matters differ in character. Wherefore there must needs be different virtues, though they regard the one sense. Ad secundum dicendum quod delectationes venereae sunt vehementiores et magis opprimentes rationem quam delectationes ciborum. Et propter hoc magis indigent castigatione et refrenatione, quia si eis consentiatur, magis ex hoc increscit vis concupiscentiae, et deiicitur virtus mentis. Unde dicit Augustinus, in I Soliloq., nihil esse sentio quod magis ex arce deiiciat animum virilem quam blandimenta feminae, corporumque ille contactus sine quo uxor haberi non potest. Reply Obj. 2: Venereal pleasures are more impetuous, and are more oppressive on the reason than the pleasures of the palate: and therefore they are in greater need of chastisement and restraint, since if one consent to them this increases the force of concupiscence and weakens the strength of the mind. Hence Augustine says (Soliloq. i, 10): I consider that nothing so casts down the manly mind from its heights as the fondling of women, and those bodily contacts which belong to the married state. Ad tertium dicendum quod delectationes aliorum sensuum non pertinent ad naturam hominis conservandam, nisi prout ordinantur ad delectabilia tactus. Et ideo circa huiusmodi delectationes non est aliqua alia virtus sub temperantia comprehensa. Sed delectationes ciborum, quamvis aliqualiter ordinentur ad delectationes venereorum, tamen etiam per se ordinantur ad vitam hominis conservandam. Et ideo etiam per se habent specialem virtutem, quamvis illa virtus, quae abstinentia dicitur, ordinet actum suum ad finem castitatis. Reply Obj. 3: The pleasures of the other senses do not pertain to the maintenance of man’s nature, except insofar as they are directed to pleasures of touch. Wherefore in the matter of such pleasures there is no other virtue comprised under temperance. But the pleasures of the palate, though directed somewhat to venereal pleasures, are essentially directed to the preservation of man’s life: wherefore by their very nature they have a special virtue, although this virtue which is called abstinence directs its act to chastity as its end. Articulus 4 Article 4 Utrum pudicitia pertineat specialiter ad castitatem Whether purity belongs especially to chastity? Ad quartum sic proceditur. Videtur quod pudicitia non pertineat specialiter ad castitatem. Dicit enim Augustinus, in I de Civ. Dei, quod pudicitia est quaedam virtus animae. Non ergo est aliquid ad castitatem pertinens, sed est per seipsam virtus a castitate distincta. Objection 1: It would seem that purity does not belong especially to chastity. For Augustine says (De Civ. Dei i, 18) that purity is a virtue of the soul. Therefore it is not something belonging to chastity, but is of itself a virtue distinct from chastity. Praeterea, pudicitia a pudore dicitur, qui videtur idem esse verecundiae. Sed verecundia, secundum Damascenum, est de turpi actu, quod convenit omni actui vitioso. Ergo pudicitia non magis pertinet ad castitatem quam ad alias virtutes. Obj. 2: Further, pudicitia (purity) is derived from pudor, which is equivalent to shame. Now shame, according to Damascene, is about a disgraceful act, and this is common to all sinful acts. Therefore purity belongs no more to chastity than to the other virtues. Praeterea, philosophus dicit, in III Ethic., quod omnis intemperantia generaliter est maxime exprobrabilis. Sed ad pudicitiam pertinere videtur fugere ea quae exprobrabilia sunt. Ergo pudicitia pertinet ad omnes partes temperantiae, non autem specialiter ad castitatem. Obj. 3: Further, the Philosopher says (Ethic. iii, 12) that every kind of intemperance is most deserving of reproach. Now it would seem to belong to purity to avoid all that is deserving of reproach. Therefore purity belongs to all the parts of temperance, and not especially to chastity. Sed contra est quod Augustinus dicit, in libro de perseverantia, praedicanda est pudicitia, ut ab eo qui habet aures audiendi, nihil genitalibus membris illicitum perpetretur. Sed usus genitalium membrorum proprie pertinet ad castitatem. Ergo pudicitia proprie ad castitatem pertinet. On the contrary, Augustine says (De Perseverantia xx): We must give praise to purity, that he who has ears to hear, may put to none but a lawful use the organs intended for procreation. Now the use of these organs is the proper matter of chastity. Therefore purity belongs properly to chastity. Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut dictum est, nomen pudicitiae a pudore sumitur, in quo verecundia significatur. Et ideo oportet quod pudicitia proprie sit circa illa de quibus homines magis verecundantur. Maxime autem verecundantur homines de actibus venereis, ut Augustinus dicit, in XIV de Civ. Dei, in tantum quod etiam concubitus coniugalis, qui honestate nuptiarum decoratur, verecundia non careat. Et hoc ideo quia motus genitalium membrorum non subditur imperio rationis, sicut motus aliorum exteriorum membrorum. Verecundatur autem homo non solum de illa mixtione venerea, sed etiam de quibuscumque signis eius, ut philosophus dicit, in II Rhet. Et ideo pudicitia attenditur proprie circa venerea, et praecipue circa signa venereorum, sicut sunt aspectus impudici, oscula et tactus. Et quia haec magis solent deprehendi, ideo pudicitia magis respicit huiusmodi exteriora signa, castitas autem magis ipsam veneream commixtionem. Et ideo pudicitia ad castitatem ordinatur, non quasi virtus ab ipsa distincta, sed sicut exprimens castitatis circumstantiam quandam. Interdum tamen unum pro alio ponitur. I answer that, As stated above (Obj. 2), pudicitia (purity) takes its name from pudor, which signifies shame. Hence purity must needs be properly about the things of which man is most ashamed. Now men are most ashamed of venereal acts, as Augustine remarks (De Civ. Dei xiv, 18), so much so that even the conjugal act, which is adorned by the honesty of marriage, is not devoid of shame: and this because the movement of the organs of generation is not subject to the command of reason, as are the movements of the other external members. Now man is ashamed not only of this sexual union but also of all the signs thereof, as the Philosopher observes (Rhet. ii, 6). Consequently purity regards venereal matters properly, and especially the signs thereof, such as impure looks, kisses, and touches. And since the latter are more wont to be observed, purity regards rather these external signs, while chastity regards rather sexual union. Therefore purity is directed to chastity, not as a virtue distinct therefrom, but as expressing a circumstance of chastity. Nevertheless the one is sometimes used to designate the other. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod Augustinus ibi accipit pudicitiam pro castitate. Reply Obj. 1: Augustine is here speaking of purity as designating chastity. Ad secundum dicendum quod, quamvis omnia vitia habeant turpitudinem quandam, specialiter tamen vitia intemperantiae, ut ex supra dictis patet. Reply Obj. 2: Although every vice has a certain disgrace, the vices of intemperance are especially disgraceful, as stated above (Q. 142, A. 4). Ad tertium dicendum quod inter vitia intemperantiae praecipue sunt exprobrabilia peccata venerea. Tum propter inobedientiam genitalium membrorum. Tum propter hoc quod ratio ab huiusmodi maxime absorbetur. Reply Obj. 3: Among the vices of intemperance, venereal sins are most deserving of reproach, both on account of the insubordination of the genital organs, and because by these sins especially, the reason is absorbed. Quaestio 152 Question 152 De virginitate Virginity Deinde considerandum est de virginitate. Et circa hoc quaeruntur quinque. We must now consider virginity: and under this head there are five points of inquiry: Primo, in quo consistit virginitas. (1) In what does virginity consist? Secundo, utrum sit licita. (2) Whether it is lawful? Tertio, utrum sit virtus. (3) Whether it is a virtue? Quarto, de excellentia eius respectu matrimonii. (4) Of its excellence in comparison with marriage; Quinto, de excellentia eius respectu aliarum virtutum. (5) Of its excellence in comparison with the other virtues. Articulus 1 Article 1 Utrum virginitas consistat in integritate carnis Whether virginity consists in integrity of the flesh? Ad primum sic proceditur. Videtur quod virginitas non consistat in integritate carnis. Dicit enim Augustinus, in libro de Nupt. et Concup., quod virginitas est in carne corruptibili incorruptionis perpetua meditatio. Sed meditatio non pertinet ad carnem. Ergo virginitas non consistit in carne. Objection 1: It would seem that virginity does not consist in integrity of the flesh. For Augustine says (De Nup. et Concup.) 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. Praeterea, virginitas pudicitiam quandam importat. Sed Augustinus dicit, in I de Civ. Dei, quod pudicitia consistit in anima. Ergo virginitas non consistit in carnis incorruptione. Obj. 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.