FutureCarmeliteClaire Posted November 17, 2012 Share Posted November 17, 2012 This thread is far too sexy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG45 Posted November 17, 2012 Share Posted November 17, 2012 Oh, this topic again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anastasia13 Posted November 17, 2012 Share Posted November 17, 2012 [quote name='Freedom' timestamp='1353109605' post='2511493']If that is too hard for you remain celibate, don't drag a man and potential children into your confusion, it's unfair to him and to the kids.[/quote]1 Corinthians 7: [sup]8 [/sup]But I say to the unmarried, and to the widows: It is good for them if they so continue, even as I. [sup]9 [/sup]But if they do not contain themselves, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to be burnt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basilisa Marie Posted November 17, 2012 Share Posted November 17, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Norseman82' timestamp='1353135388' post='2511734'] Actually, the opposite is true - it IS indeed something that our spouses are supposed to get, if we truly believe that it is God's plan that people wait until marriage to have sex. [/quote] No, it's not, because Virginity isn't a magical token. Focusing on some physical state of being reduces a person to that state of being, and ignores virtue. Furthermore, we don't have any real definition of what a virgin is anymore, so that state of being has become virtually worthless. There IS no real definition of virginity, so how can we use that as the measure of what we give our spouse? Chastity, on the other hand, is something we can offer our spouse, and is what our future spouses are supposed to get. Although I think the idea of "purity" can be problematic too, I think it's a better descriptive of the ideal, of what we're supposed to offer our spouse. Purity denotes a single-mindedness, a complete and full dedication to your spouse (or to God). Virginity is a physical state of being, Purity deals with your will, and Chastity is virtue. Purity, I think, might work better in your "something I'm supposed to get" argument, but even then it's problematic because people are flawed, are prone to temptation and sin, and it's not fair. Plus, think about it this way: What if we did consider virginity some magic token meant for you, from your future spouse? So what happens when you meet your future spouse, and find that they've made a mistake and give your special token to someone else? I would feel hurt and resentful. I might even wonder what the point of saving my magic token for my spouse was, if I wasn't going to get one in return. I'd wonder if I should break up with my future spouse, because they haven't been as faithful to our future marriage covenant as I have. But how does this mindset foster forgiveness? How does it promote the virtue of chastity? If we instead looked at the issue from the position that chastity is what we give our spouse, it puts both people on an even playing field. It doesn't really matter what each has done in the past, although "saving oneself" for one's future spouse is a beautiful expression of chastity. It also means that both spouses will continue to grow in chastity, and in love for one another. Furthermore, focusing on virginity instead of chastity casts sex in a negative light. Sex in a marriage is a beautiful expression of the couple's marriage vows - which is why we go so far as to call it the marital act. Chastity preserves sex in its rightful place, as an ultimate expression of love and fidelity. Sex is an expression of chastity. With the virginity mindset, sex is just something that you're not supposed to do until you're married. The Blessed Virgin Mary is the perfect example. Mary was completely and totally devoted to God in all things, body, mind, will, spirit - everything. Thus, the descriptor "virgin" is most aptly applied to her, because she was absolutely purely devoted to God. How many of us Christians can say the same thing about our devotion to our spouses, or future spouses? We can't. TLDR: Spouses don't "get" anything. They're called to fidelity and love and chastity. Virginity is just an incidental result of practicing chastity, but losing one's virginity (whatever that actually means) [i]doesn't [/i]mean that one [i]can't[/i] become more chaste in the future, or even that one wasn't chaste (in the case of sexual assault). It's not helpful to think of virginity first, if we're talking about the lives of Christians. Edited November 17, 2012 by Basilisa Marie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted November 17, 2012 Share Posted November 17, 2012 Virginity isn't magical, it is holy and it is more than just a physical state. " Because you all know that every little girl that is born, is born with a seal, so to speak, protecting the mystery of her femininity, which is the womb. There is a seal and if you understand, a seal always indicates something which is sacred. The seal, which doesn’t exist in the male body, is profoundly symbolic and says this belongs to God in a special way. This is a sphere which is so beautiful and so profound that it cannot be touched upon, except with God’s permission, in a Catholic marriage. When a girl or young woman is permitted to give the keys of this mysterious domain, this closed garden, to her husband-to-be, she says: "Up until now I have kept this garden virginal, now God has given me the keys and is allowing me to give them to you and I know that you will penetrate into it, with trembling reverence and gratitude". The moment that a woman is embraced by her husband and a few hours afterwards she conceives, in this very moment, something absolutely amazing happens which once again illuminates the greatness of femininity. Neither husband nor wife can create a human soul. God alone can. Of course there is the male seed and there is the female egg. These are material realities that God has put into the bodies and when they are united, an amazing thing happens. God creates a new human soul, totally new, which never existed before. Where? In the mystery of the female body. This is where the soul is conceived. It has nothing to do with the husband. The husband is out of the game at this point and the very moment that God creates a soul he implies that there is a special contact between God and the female body, so to speak, touching it in creating it. Once again, what an extraordinary privilege." -- Alice von Hildebrand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinytherese Posted November 17, 2012 Share Posted November 17, 2012 By saying that you're willing to marry a non-virgin doesn't mean that you don't consider premarital sex a sin or that you don't see it as a very serious sin. I cannot help but think that there are people reading this thread who are no longer virgins that feel less than worthy of love. They think that they are dirty and damaged goods. Because of their past, people see them as not good enough to have a happy fulfilling marriage. Yes, what they did was wrong, but does that mean that it's too late for them. If we keep telling them such messages, why would they be motivated to stop their behavior? Our God is merciful and Christ gave us the sacrament of confession to help us turn our lives around. There have been numerous saints who were previously less than pure as the driven snow--St. Augustine, St. Margaret of Cortuna, and St. Mary of Egypt, just to name a few. There have also been many saints who greatly sinned in other ways. St. Paul wanted to arrest and put to death everyone who claimed to be a Christian. Even Our Lord's own disciples committed horrible sins--St. Peter denied that he even knew Jesus three times, and this was that man that he chose to be the very first pope. Yet each one of them felt genuine sorrow for their sins and trusted in the Lord's mercy to forgive them. But He did more than forgive them, He transformed them into great saints. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maggyie Posted November 17, 2012 Share Posted November 17, 2012 I don't know. I find that paragraph about little girls and their seals pretty creepy. I'm sad that it's from Alice von Hildebrand. The hymen is just a bit of extra tissue, a membrane, and many women are born without one. It's also not exactly a perfect seal since after all women start menstruating at age 13 and the blood comes through the hymen. It's not so much a seal as it is a screen door. She seems to make virginity a bigger issue for women than for men ("it doesn't exist in the male body."). It is equally important for both. Then again it's important to not diminish the importance physical virginity has in the Church. It's true Mary is "virginial" in the sense of giving everything to God, but at the same time she is also physically a perpetual virgin and being physically set apart from being a sexual partner with men is important for understanding her role. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the171 Posted November 17, 2012 Share Posted November 17, 2012 [quote name='FutureCarmeliteClaire' timestamp='1353163335' post='2511788'] This thread is far too sexy. [/quote] I'll just leave now before I cause a sexy overload. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted November 17, 2012 Share Posted November 17, 2012 [quote name='Maggie' timestamp='1353185228' post='2511947'] I don't know. I find that paragraph about little girls and their seals pretty creepy. [/quote] That comment was both unneeded and disrespectful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maggyie Posted November 17, 2012 Share Posted November 17, 2012 [quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1353185603' post='2511949'] That comment was both unneeded and disrespectful. [/quote] How so? It just seems creepy to me. I'm sure she didn't mean to be. But it is... creepy. Humans aren't the only mammal where the females typically have hymens. Female cats, elephants, rats, and seals all have hymens. Is this God's way of saying the female rat's virginity is sacred? Nah. It's membranous tissue. I get what she's trying to say but unfortunately the symbolic meaning of reproductive organs has its limits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted November 17, 2012 Share Posted November 17, 2012 [quote name='Maggie' timestamp='1353185966' post='2511952'] How so? It just seems creepy to me. I'm sure she didn't mean to be. But it is... creepy. [/quote] Because it isn't creepy. Stop being so judgmental. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basilisa Marie Posted November 17, 2012 Share Posted November 17, 2012 [quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1353183492' post='2511933'] Virginity isn't magical, it is holy and it is more than just a physical state. " Because you all know that every little girl that is born, is born with a seal, so to speak, protecting the mystery of her femininity, which is the womb. There is a seal and if you understand, a seal always indicates something which is sacred. The seal, which doesn’t exist in the male body, is profoundly symbolic and says this belongs to God in a special way. This is a sphere which is so beautiful and so profound that it cannot be touched upon, except with God’s permission, in a Catholic marriage. When a girl or young woman is permitted to give the keys of this mysterious domain, this closed garden, to her husband-to-be, she says: "Up until now I have kept this garden virginal, now God has given me the keys and is allowing me to give them to you and I know that you will penetrate into it, with trembling reverence and gratitude". The moment that a woman is embraced by her husband and a few hours afterwards she conceives, in this very moment, something absolutely amazing happens which once again illuminates the greatness of femininity. Neither husband nor wife can create a human soul. God alone can. Of course there is the male seed and there is the female egg. These are material realities that God has put into the bodies and when they are united, an amazing thing happens. God creates a new human soul, totally new, which never existed before. Where? In the mystery of the female body. This is where the soul is conceived. It has nothing to do with the husband. The husband is out of the game at this point and the very moment that God creates a soul he implies that there is a special contact between God and the female body, so to speak, touching it in creating it. Once again, what an extraordinary privilege." -- Alice von Hildebrand [/quote] So I don't understand something here. If someone could clarify this for me, and help me understand, that'd be great. I get that part of a woman's femininity is the sacred mystery of the union between body and soul, which occurs in her womb. It's an extraordinary privilege, I wouldn't deny that. However, what I'm reading from this is that a woman's hymen is what denotes her virginity, and that men are incapable of being virgins because they lack a hymen. What happens if a woman's hymen is broken through other activity? Or if she was raped? Are we to think that she didn't do enough to protect her "sacred garden"? Is she still a virgin if she engages in sexual activities that don't involve "breaking the seal"? And if virginity is truly just a feminine construct, and is given in a "transaction" with her husband, does she get nothing in return? Alice von Hildebrand's passage is beautiful. But it seems to me that it has to be properly contextualized. It's supposed to be about the mystery of the feminine, and leaves much to be desired when talking about the nature of virginity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted November 17, 2012 Share Posted November 17, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Maggie' timestamp='1353185228' post='2511947'] I don't know. I find that paragraph about little girls and their seals pretty creepy. I'm sad that it's from Alice von Hildebrand. The hymen is just a bit of extra tissue, a membrane, and many women are born without one. It's also not exactly a perfect seal since after all women start menstruating at age 13 and the blood comes through the hymen. It's not so much a seal as it is a screen door. She seems to make virginity a bigger issue for women than for men ("it doesn't exist in the male body."). It is equally important for both. Then again it's important to not diminish the importance physical virginity has in the Church. It's true Mary is "virginial" in the sense of giving everything to God, but at the same time she is also physically a perpetual virgin and being physically set apart from being a sexual partner with men is important for understanding her role. [/quote] [quote name='Basilisa Marie' timestamp='1353186363' post='2511954'] So I don't understand something here. If someone could clarify this for me, and help me understand, that'd be great. I get that part of a woman's femininity is the sacred mystery of the union between body and soul, which occurs in her womb. It's an extraordinary privilege, I wouldn't deny that. However, what I'm reading from this is that a woman's hymen is what denotes her virginity, and that men are incapable of being virgins because they lack a hymen. What happens if a woman's hymen is broken through other activity? Or if she was raped? Are we to think that she didn't do enough to protect her "sacred garden"? Is she still a virgin if she engages in sexual activities that don't involve "breaking the seal"? And if virginity is truly just a feminine construct, and is given in a "transaction" with her husband, does she get nothing in return? Alice von Hildebrand's passage is beautiful. But it seems to me that it has to be properly contextualized. It's supposed to be about the mystery of the feminine, and leaves much to be desired when talking about the nature of virginity. [/quote] I am relatively sure that it was meant to be taken sort of metonymously. The hymen represents purity, even though physically it generally has nothing to do with it. But then again, I really like both the von Hildebrands, and I am more or less inclined to agree with anything either of them says. If we take her speaking about the "seal" to be a metonym for purity and chastity, then it makes complete sense when she says that it is "profoundly symbolic" and "sacred". It is not to say that male purity is less important. But look at the Church Herself. Mary's virginity holds a special place of reverence in our faith, and Mary as the new Eve represents all women and the Church. She does not denigrate male purity, but she especially exalts the female aspect of purity as it relates to creation and salvation. I do not think there is anything wrong with Dr. von Hildebrand's comments. Edited November 17, 2012 by Nihil Obstat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basilisa Marie Posted November 17, 2012 Share Posted November 17, 2012 (edited) [quote name='KnightofChrist' timestamp='1353186213' post='2511953'] Because it isn't creepy. Stop being so judgmental. [/quote] It's creepy if someone thinks it's creepy. As a woman, I can see how it can be a bit creepy. It's not being judgmental. Being judgmental is writing off someone's personal perception as wrong because it disagrees with your personal perception. Edited November 17, 2012 by Basilisa Marie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basilisa Marie Posted November 17, 2012 Share Posted November 17, 2012 [quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1353186457' post='2511955'] I am relatively sure that it was meant to be taken sort of metonymously. The hymen represents purity, even though physically it generally has nothing to do with it. But then again, I really like both the von Hildebrands, and I am more or less inclined to agree with anything either of them says. If we take her speaking about the "seal" to be a metonym for purity and chastity, then it makes complete sense when she says that it is "profoundly symbolic" and "sacred". It is not to say that male purity is less important. But look at the Church Herself. Mary's virginity holds a special place of reverence in our faith, and Mary as the new Eve represents all women and the Church. She does not denigrate male purity, but she especially exalts the female aspect of purity as it relates to creation and salvation. I do not think there is anything wrong with Dr. von Hildebrand's comments. [/quote] If the hymen represents purity, it's very, very easy for someone to take that image and say that lack of hymen represent impurity. While I don't disagree that the hymen CAN represent purity, it's a tricky line of logic to follow, and has untrue implications. Taken in the context of this thread, her passage seems to imply that it's more important for women to be pure than it is for men. Male purity seems to be secondary to female purity...and thus it seems that the next step of logic is that it's more important for women to be "pure" than men. So basically I'm not saying that I have an explicit problem with what Alice von Hildebrand is saying...just that it needs to be properly contextualized. If it's not, it can have lots of not-good implications. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts