Are Virgins valuable to the Catholic Church?

[Kamaduck]

Are virgins valuable or significant to the Catholic Church community? As much as for my salvation, what other value does keeping one’s virginity have on others?

I suppose serving as an example is one, that it is possible to keep and live a life of pure chastity.

I don’t think this OP reduces people to property- at least, not the property of other people. But it is strange to ask if there are benefits other than not having sinned in keeping one’s virginity.

Yes, you are serving as an example… Though I’m not sure it’s something people should advertise. “I’m a virgin, and you can be, too!” Sounds a like a weird topic for regular discussion.

You’ll have less baggage in general.

You won’t have risked pregnancy or STD’s.

Maybe you get to sing a special song in heaven.

But ultimately? I don’t think there’s that much to it. All it means is that you’ve never committed one particular sin- fornication. Since we can just as easily be separated from God by lying, lust, stealing, cheating, or drug abuse, what’s the big deal if we have avoided just one of those sins?

Basically, I don’t think we get a medal for not fornicating, any more than we get a medal for not abusing drugs.

It’s still a very good endeavor, sure. But I think avoiding lying is a very good endeavor, too, as is avoiding theft. I don’t understand why there should be any particular emphasis on not fornicating- other than that, as mentioned, fornicating will leave behind a lot of baggage and can have long-lasting consequences.

 

[twf]

Men can take a lifelong vow of celibacy, so I am not quite sure that I understand what you are saying. Do you have any references to actual Church documents, specifically ones stating that only women may actually be virgins in the physical sense?

Yes, men can achieve perfection of charity and live a consecrated life as well - but men are never described as “virgins” in the Catholic tradition, nor can men be called to the specific vocation of consecrated virginity - a rite that bishops may only bestown upon women. See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consecrated_virgin for more information.

In a spiritual sense virginity can refer to men in the sense of sexual purity, but a male saint will never be honored as a Virgin in the way that women are. The Catholic Encyclopedia has more information:

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.

(Emphasis added)
newadvent.org/cathen/15458a.htm

 

[Francie3]

Chastity is required in marriage, one may only respond to one’s spouse.
Chastity and fidelity is tested in marriage also.

Marriage also is miraculous!
Without conjugal marriage no priest would exist, you wouldn’t exist, no new wonderful child of God with an eternal soul would exist.

Saint Therese’s parents wanted to be a priest, a nun. They tried but didn’t have the vocation. They remained chaste for a while even after marriage.
But if they hadn’t changed that, there would be no Saint Therese.
And both St Therese’s parents were beatified by Pope John Paul 2 (who also only exists because he had a mother and a father. How sacred therefore the vocation of marriage, as indeed the Priesthood is also sacred.

Every life has it’s burdens. A young man becomes a priest. He marries people but has no companion of his own. He baptizes others babies, never has any of his own. He hears all manner of sin, has loneliness, has times of doubt and boredom too, as life is a long time and he will go through stages. He can help some, others, his efforts will fail miserably.

In either Married life, or Priesthood or Religious life, we all will be tested to our limit, we all will have the graces of our vocations and Sacraments, we all have the call to be holy.

I saw your post where others are pushing you to religious life because you made mention…may you trust God to guide you.

 

[Francie3]

Inartful or not, I would have thought my question was obvious with its intent.

Valuable doesn’t mean literally about material worth, I meant spiritually. There’s so much emphasis on the Vatican’s riches that even on a catholic forum, that’s what people are inferring. How can virginity be sold for cash? how crude a thought. A person who inferred that must be spiritually bankrupt or autistic?

I knew instantly what you meant!
I studied literature and semantics, but I didn’t even notice how you composed your question. What matters is the question you are asking because you are trying to assess how you may most glorify God and benefit the Church. I’m regretful that you have been misunderstood. Despite how some have reacted, I understand that you honestly asked your question from the highest motives.

Basically, my response to you is meant to indicate, that whatever vocation God desires for you personally, is the most valuable for you, and is intrinsically valuable before God.

 

[SerraSemper]

Yes, virgins are valuable to the Catholic Church. THE Virgin, Our Blessed Virgin Mother Mary is the most honored and precious human being in existence. Pope Benedict XVI said that both the Petrine (clerical) and Marian (Consecrated Virgins) dimensions of the Church are essential. Virginity is a special gift to those who can receive it. Sacred virgins (those women who have received the solemn Consecration to a Life of Virginity from their bishop) are known as the choicest of the flock according to St. Cyprian. Any man or woman following Our Lady in virginity is mirroring her virginity and the Church’s virginity in a beautiful way. It is considered an “angelic” virtue because it takes a lot to maintain virginity as opposed to chastity.

 

[Fairwinds]

You’re one of the people on here who are so pedantic, you deviate from the question at hand into semantics.

don’t be uncharitable. personal attacks are frowned upon by management. I forgive you, although others would happily report the insult.

How would you have better worded the question?

I wouldn’t have asked the question.

The definition of value does not necessarily mean monetary connotations.
Noun
The regard that something is held to deserve; the importance or preciousness of something: “your support is of great value”.

don’t make a pedantic argument. why does St. Jerome say virgins get to wear gold crowns? – a statement, by the way, which squarely assigns value to virginity.

 

[Fairwinds]

Inartful or not, I would have thought my question was obvious with its intent…

you thought wrong.

 

[Fairwinds]

…
If there was confusion, i.e. other readers thought the OP was asking whether the Church could sell virgins for some nice cash, then perhaps that is a problem. I cannot really comprehend how someone could misread the OP and still come up with a reasonable interpretation, however.

that’s a strawman, no one has suggested that.

I’m trying to get an insight as to why the state of virginity appears to be so obsessively important. we know there are virgins who have committed atrocious sins and people who have committed a sexual sin, been absolved and who have gone on to lead exemplary lives. obviously, being a virgin is not an immunization to sin, do do virgin bank robbers get better treatment than regular thieves?

 

[SerraSemper]

that’s a strawman, no one has suggested that.

I’m trying to get an insight as to why the state of virginity appears to be so obsessively important. we know there are virgins who have committed atrocious sins and people who have committed a sexual sin, been absolved and who have gone on to lead exemplary lives. obviously, being a virgin is not an immunization to sin, do do virgin bank robbers get better treatment than regular thieves?

Well, when it comes down to it, I don’t think the Church **obsesses **over virginity. Far from it. If we really did obsess over it, we’d have more sacred virgins. Instead, we have a lot of excellent people who do not possess primary virginity and are trying to at least be chaste. As a consecrated virgin, I find it ironic that as a whole, our society has no problem in affirming sodomites, and yet the very fact that I chose to link my lot with the Church and be a virgin, bride, and mother as a consecrated virgin is belittled as “over sexualizing things”.

Our society has a serious problem with chastity, let alone virginity. Singles are expected to be sexually active. Children are supposed to be able to be sterilized on our tax dollars, thanks to Obamacare. Married people are supposed to have affairs as long as they are discreet. And those who do acts contrary to nature are lauded. Our society feels so entitled to have intercourse whenever they want, with whomever they want that it can’t believe that people can be fulfilled by being virgins or being in chaste monogamous marriages. Although our society has become pagan again, it does not have the respect for virginity that even pagan Rome had, nor does it understand marriage even though pagan Rome and Greece had rampant homosexuality that even they did not go so low as to call marriage.

Being a virgin has little to do with being impeccable. Being a virgin shows that a person can indeed be a normal human being who can, thanks to grace and reason, be happy and fulfilled in virginity. Virginity in Christian tradition is not totally about the physical dimension- it is a positive response to the love of God and choosing to be fulfilled by Him. Everyone is pursuing happiness, and the world needs to know that our answer to that quest is God. Virgins (men and women) who are single are called by God to maintain their virginity until/unless they get married. It should be normal for people to obey God in this area, but it isn’t. Sacred virgins are called to remain perpetually virgins all their lives and they do point to God being all sufficing and publicly put to the lie the idea that we can only find happiness in sexual acts.

 

[Fairwinds]

…

Being a virgin has little to do with being impeccable. Being a virgin shows that a person can indeed be a normal human being who can, thanks to grace and reason, be happy and fulfilled in virginity. Virginity in Christian tradition is not totally about the physical dimension- it is a positive response to the love of God and choosing to be fulfilled by Him. Everyone is pursuing happiness, and the world needs to know that our answer to that quest is God. Virgins (men and women) who are single are called by God to maintain their virginity until/unless they get married. It should be normal for people to obey God in this area, but it isn’t. Sacred virgins are called to remain perpetually virgins all their lives and they do point to God being all sufficing and publicly put to the lie the idea that we can only find happiness in sexual acts.

this is what I’m not following and what I mean by obsession of sorts. I’m not a bank robber and I haven’t shot anyone, and I’m free of a few other grave sins (and don’t get a gold crown or sing a special song). but my legacy isn’t for what I haven’t done but for what I have. in fact, Code of Canon Law, Canon 604 appears to require **acts **of service in addition to the status of virginity.

I assume that both virgins and people who have had sex outside of marriage and repented to move on with life can and often do live a Christian life and I wouldn’t want to bet on which group has the better track record. and I don’t assume that people can only find happiness in sexual acts.

 

[Tarpeian_Rock]

I checked a list of female saints. I found the following included: Saints Julia, Leocadia, Margaret, Bibiana, Seraphia, and Eulalia. Each of these was listed as “Virgin, Martyr.” Per the topic of this thread, what puzzled me was the fact that in so honoring these women, the Church appears to put the fact that they did not have sex ABOVE the fact that they gave their lives for the Faith. I truly don’t understand that priority.

 

[Baelor]

Yes, men can achieve perfection of charity and live a consecrated life as well - but men are never described as “virgins” in the Catholic tradition, nor can men be called to the specific vocation of consecrated virginity - a rite that bishops may only bestown upon women. See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consecrated_virgin for more information.

Thank you for the information. I now know that there are different words for men and women, but I suppose I was more asking about the substance of the difference.

In a spiritual sense virginity can refer to men in the sense of sexual purity, but a male saint will never be honored as a Virgin in the way that women are. The Catholic Encyclopedia has more information:
(Emphasis added)
newadvent.org/cathen/15458a.htm

The CE begins by stating that virginity is common to both men and women.

Again, I am not asking about the details of anatomy. I am familiar with them. I am wondering rather what theological difference it makes that women can have physical proof of virginity. The entry does not actually state (perhaps I did not read carefully enough) what difference this really makes.

At a more pedestrian level, it is possible for a female virgin to have her hymen torn, i.e. a female virgin whose body is not integral.

 

[SerraSemper]

If you’re concerned with why the Church glorifies virginity, even if a virgin isn’t by herself morally holier than a non-virgin, well, the only thing I can say is that the reason doesn’t come from thin air. She took her cue from Christ Her Spouse and from Her own being. As has been mentioned elsewhere, virginity in and of itself meant nothing in pre-fallen states. It was chaste living until the Fall. Then, once the Fall occurred, virginity became a special virtue only when Christ made it so. Human beings were now troubled by concupiscence. As a special reward for those who conquered this with His grace, Christ blessed the virginal state by being a virgin Himself, being born of a Virgin, and entrusting His Mother to a virgin (John). You seem to want a virgin to **do **something special. By simply being a physical virgin for any old reason, a virgin gains nothing. But by embracing virginity specifically to follow the Lamb, well, then she mirrors the Church in her virginal state to a certain extent. By passively receiving the transforming consecration to a life of virginity (c. 604), she most completely represents the Church. Again, Christ’s doing, not all hers. At the heart of the three crowns are the toughest things for humans to do. Give up life itself for Christ. Give up sex for Christ. Give up one’s intellect to the service of Christ in preaching.

 

[Fairwinds]

If you’re concerned with why the Church glorifies virginity, even if a virgin isn’t by herself morally holier than a non-virgin, well, the only thing I can say is that the reason doesn’t come from thin air.

really? virgins are intrinsically morally holier than non-virgins?

… Give up sex for Christ. … .

married couples will be scratching their heads over this call.

and on other threads they’re wailing about Catholics who “contracept Catholic schools into closing” and how Catholics aren’t having enough kids.

 

[Et_Cetera]

that’s a strawman, no one has suggested that.

I’m trying to get an insight as to why the state of virginity appears to be so obsessively important. we know there are virgins who have committed atrocious sins and people who have committed a sexual sin, been absolved and who have gone on to lead exemplary lives. obviously, being a virgin is not an immunization to sin, do do virgin bank robbers get better treatment than regular thieves?

Nicely said.

 

[SerraSemper]

really? virgins are intrinsically morally holier than non-virgins?

No, I didn’t say that. I said that virginity, in itself, aside from any moral holiness, is intrinsically praised by the Church. You completely missed my point, which is that the reason why virginity is praised and the reason why it is good is because Christ ordained it thus. It is not because of any service. Let me give an analogy. A baptized infant is worth a lot not because of the service the infant has done but because Christ has made baptism the means by which a person is united with Himself. A baptized infant will go straight to heaven if he/she dies, without ever having consciously done a single good thing. We say it is better to be baptized than not. It is because God made it a better thing.
Likewise, when we speak of virginity in itself, it is better to be a virgin than to have sinned through being unchaste. But, more importantly, it is better to be chosen by God to be a virgin bride representing the Church for those who receive the consecration than not. It’s not because the natural virgin or the consecrated has done anything good. It is not because the person is holier. It is because Christ made virginity a virtue and virginity for the sake of the Kingdom to be a high calling. Christ made being an ordained priest a high calling too. Should we call that into question and ask why? If we did ask why, we would reach the same answer. Christ made it so, irrespective of the priest’s personal holiness (or lack thereof). We are talking about states here, not personal holiness.

married couples will be scratching their heads over this call.

and on other threads they’re wailing about Catholics who “contracept Catholic schools into closing” and how Catholics aren’t having enough kids.

The crowns go to those who have specific attributes. Those who give up their life - martyrdom. I think you can safely say that many people will scratch their heads over this one. But the bottom line is that even though it is our duty to give up our life in witness to Christ if called to it, it still merits a special crown of merit. Those who give up sex. Um, virginity. Not all are called to this. Not all are given the grace. That’s why there’s the sacrament of matrimony. Those in the state of holy matrimony are called to be fruitful. The third was being a confessor- a preacher. Again, not all are called to this. If God so chooses to award martyrs, virgins, and confessors with special crowns (again, irrespective of their personal levels of holiness) so be it. You can have a very holy mother like St. Gianna who might outrank a garden variety virgin. But the virgin will have a special crown of virginity in Heaven. Again, we’re not talking about moral worth, we’re talking about objective statuses. The state of virginity is dogmatically defined as superior to the state of matrimony. The state has no reflection on the personal holiness levels of people within.

That being said, I have nothing more to say on this thread. You are free to check out my website if you are interested in states of life. There are plenty of magisterial documents you can consult online if you’re wondering WHAT the Church teaches regarding virginity and state in life as opposed to personal levels of holiness.

 

[Fairwinds]

…
That being said, I have nothing more to say on this thread. You are free to check out my website if you are interested in states of life. …

thanks, but, no.

 

[Fairwinds]

Nicely said.

I feel like robbing a bank.

 

[Baelor]

that’s a strawman, no one has suggested that.

Not quite. The mention of property did suggest that.

I’m trying to get an insight as to why the state of virginity appears to be so obsessively important.

Because it is a vocation that is especially difficult because marriage is the natural vocation and virginity is not.

we know there are virgins who have committed atrocious sins and people who have committed a sexual sin, been absolved and who have gone on to lead exemplary lives. obviously, being a virgin is not an immunization to sin, do do virgin bank robbers get better treatment than regular thieves?

Better treatment by whom?

 

[Fairwinds]

…Because it is a vocation that is especially difficult because marriage is the natural vocation and virginity is not.

for certain kinds of personalities, I’d say its quite normal, even expected.

Better treatment by whom?

by St. Peter at the pearly gates. do virgins who are bank robbers get preferential treatment over non-virgin thieves?