SECOND ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 152, Art. 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 Gen. 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 Gen. 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.

Obj. 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.

Obj. 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 Cor.

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. In 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 Cor. 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 Obj. 1: A precept implies a duty, as stated above (Q. 122, A.

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 Obj. 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 Obj. 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).

_______________________

Summa Theologica, Part II-II (Secunda Secundae) Translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province · 第 907 / 1128 题