Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae

Objection 1: It would seem that perpetual continence is not required for religious perfection. For all perfection of the Christian life began with Christ's apostles. Now the apostles do not appear to have observed continence, as evidenced by Peter, of whose mother-in-law we read Mt. 8:14. Therefore it would seem that perpetual continence is not requisite for religious perfection.

Objection 2: Further, the first example of perfection is shown to us in the person of Abraham, to whom the Lord said (Gn. 17:1): "Walk before Me, and be perfect." Now the copy should not surpass the example. Therefore perpetual continence is not requisite for religious perfection.

Objection 3: Further, that which is required for religious perfection is to be found in every religious order. Now there are some religious who lead a married life. Therefore religious perfection does not require perpetual continence.

On the contrary, The Apostle says (2 Cor. 7:1): "Let us cleanse ourselves from all defilement of the flesh and of the spirit, perfecting sanctification in the fear of God." Now cleanness of flesh and spirit is safeguarded by continence, for it is said (1 Cor. 7:34): "The unmarried woman and the virgin thinketh on the things of the Lord that she may be holy both in spirit and in body ." Therefore religious perfection requires continence.

I answer that, The religious state requires the removal of whatever hinders man from devoting himself entirely to God's service. Now the use of sexual union hinders the mind from giving itself wholly to the service of God, and this for two reasons. First, on account of its vehement delectation, which by frequent repetition increases concupiscence, as also the Philosopher observes (Ethic. iii, 12): and hence it is that the use of venery withdraws the mind from that perfect intentness on tending to God. Augustine expresses this when he says (Solil. i, 10): "I consider that nothing so casts down the manly mind from its height as the fondling of women, and those bodily contacts which belong to the married state." Secondly, because it involves man in solicitude for the control of his wife, his children, and his temporalities which serve for their upkeep. Hence the Apostle says (1 Cor. 7:32,33): "He that is without a wife is solicitous for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please God: but he that is with a wife is solicitous for the things of the world, how he may please his wife."

Therefore perpetual continence, as well as voluntary poverty, is requisite for religious perfection. Wherefore just as Vigilantius was condemned for equaling riches to poverty, so was Jovinian condemned for equaling marriage to virginity.

Reply to Objection 1: The perfection not only of poverty but also of continence was introduced by Christ Who said (Mt. 19:12): "There are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs, for the kingdom of heaven," and then added: "He that can take, let him take it." And lest anyone should be deprived of the hope of attaining perfection, he admitted to the state of perfection those even who were married. Now the husbands could not without committing an injustice forsake their wives, whereas men could without injustice renounce riches. Wherefore Peter whom He found married, He severed not from his wife, while "He withheld from marriage John who wished to marry" .

Reply to Objection 2: As Augustine says (De Bono Conjug. xxii), "the chastity of celibacy is better than the chastity of marriage, one of which Abraham had in use, both of them in habit. For he lived chastely, and he might have been chaste without marrying, but it was not requisite then." Nevertheless if the patriarchs of old had perfection of mind together with wealth and marriage, which is a mark of the greatness of their virtue, this is no reason why any weaker person should presume to have such great virtue that he can attain to perfection though rich and married; as neither does a man unarmed presume to attack his enemy, because Samson slew many foes with the jaw-bone of an ass. For those fathers, had it been seasonable to observe continence and poverty, would have been most careful to observe them.

Reply to Objection 3: Such ways of living as admit of the use of marriage are not the religious life simply and absolutely speaking, but in a restricted sense, in so far as they have a certain share in those things that belong to the religious state.

Articulus 4

Argumentum 1

Ad quartum sic proceditur. Videtur quod perpetua continentia non requiratur ad perfectionem religionis. Omnis enim christianae vitae perfectio ab apostolis christi coepit. Sed apostoli continentiam non videntur servasse, ut patet de Petro, qui socrum legitur habuisse, Matth. VIII.

Ergo videtur quod ad perfectionem religionis non requiratur perpetua continentia.

Argumentum 2

Praeterea, primum perfectionis exemplar nobis in Abraham ostenditur, cui dominus dixit, Gen. XVII, ambula coram me, et esto perfectus.

Sed exemplatum non oportet quod excedat exemplar. Ergo non requiritur ad perfectionem religionis perpetua continentia.

Argumentum 3

Praeterea, illud quod requiritur ad perfectionem religionis, in omni religione invenitur. Sunt autem aliqui religiosi qui uxoribus utuntur. Non ergo religionis perfectio exigit perpetuam continentiam.

Sed Contra

Sed contra est quod apostolus dicit, II ad Cor. VII, mundemus nos ab omni inquinamento carnis et spiritus, perficientes sanctificationem nostram in timore dei.

Sed munditia carnis et spiritus conservatur per continentiam, dicitur enim I ad Cor. VII, mulier innupta et virgo cogitat quae domini sunt, ut sit sancta corpore et spiritu.

Ergo perfectio religionis requirit continentiam.

Corpus

Respondeo dicendum quod ad statum religionis requiritur subtractio eorum per quae homo impeditur ne totaliter feratur ad dei servitium. Usus autem carnalis copulae retrahit animum ne totaliter feratur in dei servitium, dupliciter. Uno modo, propter vehementiam delectationis, ex cuius frequenti experientia augetur concupiscentia, ut etiam philosophus dicit, in III ethic..

Et inde est quod usus venereorum retrahit animam ab illa perfecta intentione tendendi in deum.

Et hoc est quod Augustinus dicit, 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.

Alio modo, propter sollicitudinem quam ingerit homini de gubernatione uxoris et filiorum, et rerum temporalium quae ad eorum sustentationem sufficiant.

Unde apostolus dicit quod qui sine uxore est, sollicitus est quae sunt domini, quomodo placeat deo, qui autem cum uxore est, sollicitus est quae sunt mundi, quomodo placeat uxori.

Et ideo continentia perpetua requiritur ad perfectionem religionis, sicut et voluntaria paupertas.

Unde sicut damnatus est vigilantius, qui adaequavit divitias paupertati; ita damnatus est Iovinianus, qui adaequavit matrimonium virginitati.

Ad 1

Ad primum ergo dicendum quod perfectio non solum paupertatis, sed etiam continentiae, introducta est per christum, qui dicit, Matth. XIX, sunt eunuchi qui castraverunt seipsos propter regnum caelorum, et postea subdit, qui potest capere, capiat.

Et ne alicui spes perveniendi ad perfectionem tolleretur, assumpsit ad perfectionis statum etiam illos quos invenit matrimonio iunctos. Non autem poterat absque iniuria fieri quod viri uxores desererent, sicut absque iniuria fiebat quod homines divitias relinquerent. Et ideo Petrum, quem invenit matrimonio iunctum, non separavit ab uxore.

Ioannem tamen nubere volentem a nuptiis revocavit.

Ad 2

Ad secundum dicendum quod, sicut Augustinus dicit, in libro de bono coniug., melior est castitas caelibum quam castitas nuptiarum, quarum Abraham unam habebat in usu, ambas in habitu.

Caste quippe coniugaliter vixit, esse autem castus sine coniugio potuit, sed tunc non oportuit.

Nec tamen quia antiqui patres perfectionem animi simul cum divitiis et matrimonio habuerunt, quod ad magnitudinem virtutis pertinebat, propter hoc infirmiores quique debent praesumere se tantae virtutis esse ut cum divitiis et matrimonio possint ad perfectionem pervenire, sicut nec aliquis praesumit hostes inermis invadere quia Samson cum mandibula asini multos hostium peremit. Nam illi patres, si tempus fuisset continentiae et paupertatis servandae, studiosius hoc implessent.

Ad 3

Ad tertium dicendum quod illi modi vivendi secundum quos homines matrimonio utuntur, non sunt simpliciter et absolute loquendo religiones, sed secundum quid, inquantum scilicet in aliquo participant quaedam quae ad statum religionis pertinent.