it depends on the context. here we are discussing virginity, not babysitting.What we do and what we don’t do are of equal importance. For example, wouldn’t it matter to you if a babysitter for your child (if you have one) had never committed a felony offense?
You are presenting a false dichotomy in suggesting that either it has to be a tax cheat virgin or a good person who isn’t a virgin. It’s possible for someone to be physically a virgin and a “tax cheat”. But there are many examples of saints who remained a virgin their whole life and were virtuous. Related to this is the parable in the Bible of the five wise maidens VS the five foolish maidens in Matt 25.it depends on the context. here we are discussing virginity, not babysitting.
case one: a virgin who is also a tax cheat.
case two: your Mom.
why does the tax cheat get to wear a crown and your Mom doesn’t? I know, as a matter of stone cold fact, my Mom deserves two or three crowns.
why is virginity only looked favorable upon women ? why would that same importance not be the same for a man ?After martyr it is the most important thing for a woman to have had if she was unmarried.
I’m not submitting a false dichotomy. I submit to you there have been virgins who were not virtuous. I gave an example of one who wasn’t for a specific reason.You are presenting a false dichotomy in suggesting that either it has to be a tax cheat virgin or a good person who isn’t a virgin. It’s possible for someone to be a physically a virgin. But there are many examples of saints who remained a virgin their whole life and were virtuous. Read the parable in the Bible of the ten wise virgins VS the ten foolish virgins.
If Christian morality had nothing to do with what we do with our bodies it wouldn’t matter if someone was a rapist. But I think you would agree that rape is wrong.I’m not submitting a false dichotomy. I submit to you there have been virgins who were not virtuous. I gave an example of one who wasn’t for a specific reason.
vs. Mom. who was a saint. but not a virgin.
so why does a non-virtuous virgin get to wear a crown and Mom doesn’t?
because virginity is something that trumps everything else?
I’m not following that line of reasoning.If Christian morality had nothing to do with what we do with our bodies it wouldn’t matter if someone was a rapist. But I think you would agree that rape is wrong.
The title of “virgin” isn’t given to male saints; it’s a grammar thing. Male virginity isn’t considered less important.I find the pretext of virginity only being important in the Church focused on women only to be a bit disturbing…
If the Catholic Church is only focusing on the virginity of females as being something to be considered " holy " or that a females’ virginity merits more than a mans’, then what is the deal ?
Why is this debate only focusing on female virginity ?
If male virginity is of no importance in the spiritual realm of " holiness " an is of little importance to the Catholic Church, nor is of no importance to men who are considering a religious life, then why should any Catholic male even worry about being a virgin in the first place let alone save his virginity for marriage .
why am I seeing responses on female saints who remained virgins yet nothing towards male saints who have done the same .
Feel free to quote scriptures till you are blue in the face, but at least try to answer what I asked after you start quoting scripture an not pointing to scripture as the answer.
I came across these two examples a few months ago on another Catholic forum:I find the pretext of virginity only being important in the Church focused on women only to be a bit disturbing…
If the Catholic Church is only focusing on the virginity of females as being something to be considered " holy " or that a females’ virginity merits more than a mans’, then what is the deal ?
Why is this debate only focusing on female virginity ?
If male virginity is of no importance in the spiritual realm of " holiness " an is of little importance to the Catholic Church, nor is of no importance to men who are considering a religious life, then why should any Catholic male even worry about being a virgin in the first place let alone save his virginity for marriage .
why am I seeing responses on female saints who remained virgins yet nothing towards male saints who have done the same .
Feel free to quote scriptures till you are blue in the face, but at least try to answer what I asked after you start quoting scripture an not pointing to scripture as the answer.
It was, I know, a well-intentioned attempt to prolong virginity at a time when sex before marriage and unwanted pregnancy were the ultimate taboos.
From: thetimes.co.uk/tto/public/dating/article3386540.eceIn the 21st century any man who is happy to wait months for sex is either getting it elsewhere, not that interested in you or has some sort of sexual dysfunction.
From: Singles in America: Match.com Releases Third Annual Comprehensive Study on the Single PopulationDoes a date’s height, debt and virginity really matter? 71% of women are not likely to date someone shorter than themselves; 42% of singles would not date a virgin (33% of men and 51% of women); and 65% of singles would not date someone with considerable credit card debt (>$5K).
well 57 it might help then for the Church to start emphasizing that male virginity is just as important and equal as female virginity if young men are to be encouraged that holding on to the gift given to them should be only used in the sacrament of Marriage.I came across these two examples a few months ago on another Catholic forum:
From: thetimes.co.uk/tto/public/dating/article3386540.ece
From: Singles in America: Match.com Releases Third Annual Comprehensive Study on the Single Population
It might have something to do with evolutionary biology which suggests that masculinity is tied to fecundity (which is demonstrated by sexual experience, apparently [and seen in the top quote]). On the other hand, paternal certainty rests on female chastity, thus making female virginity more important, at least in that regard. I’ve read that such thinking only started after the agricultural revolution (upwards of 10,000 years ago). Anyhow, I would imagine that such thoughts could have an impact on religion. That all said, men and women are both obligated to save themselves for marriage. So, from a religious standpoint, both genders of virginity are good, but culturally, one seems to be more emphasized (which may be why women don’t see male virginity as important, since both two of three factors [biology and culture] do not give them reason to [religion being the third]).
+Sebastian
The crown of the parents are their children…I’m not following that line of reasoning.
we don’t have to reason by analogy, we have concrete examples right on point.
case one: a virgin who lives a fairly normal life of service.
case two: Mom, who rolled over on a grenade to save her children.
why does the fairly ordinary virgin get a crown and Mom doesn’t?
because according to Christian morality, the virgin who didn’t have sex is conslusively better than Mom?
Having said that, it is presumed that a consecrated virgin is such in order to be radically available to the work of the Lord. The holy women designated “virgin and martyr” were described as spiritual athletes of the highest order, not simply women who were inclined to avoid marriage in order to suit themselves and perhaps do a good deed here or there.The crown of the parents are their children…
Then I looked and there was the Lamb standing on Mount Zion, and with him a hundred and forty-four thousand who had his name and his Father’s name written on their foreheads. I heard a sound from heaven like the sound of rushing water or a loud peal of thunder. The sound I heard was like that of harpists playing their harps. They were singing (what seemed to be) a new hymn before the throne, before the four living creatures and the elders. No one could learn this hymn except the hundred and forty-four thousand who had been ransomed from the earth. These are they who were not defiled with women; they are virgins and these are the ones who follow the Lamb wherever he goes. They have been ransomed as the first fruits of the human race for God and the Lamb. On their lips no deceit has been found; they are unblemished.The title of “virgin” isn’t given to male saints; it’s a grammar thing. Male virginity isn’t considered less important.
I assume you are referring to this kind of asexual: asexuality.org/home/overview.htmlWhat about asexuals? Would they be more highly regarded? Not trying to be snarky.
Who would ever be so rude as to ask a consecrated virgin she didn’t secretly desire to be sexually active? Who, then, would imply that a consecrated virgin (or a monk or nun, for that matter) does not gain merit if her (or his) libido wasn’t high enough to make her desire for the company of a spouse a source of suffering? The epistle says that there is no sin if those who are on fire marry, but that it is better to be free of the distractions that come as part of marriage. The reason a consecrated virgin is praiseworthy is not that she has withheld herself from men, but rather that she has given herself entirely to God. That is not easy for anyone. So no, the Christian who dedicates himself or herself entirely to sanctity, even to the point of forsaking the chance for a spouse and family, cannot “get off easily”, even if their temptation does not primarily come in the realm of the sexual faculty. If they are faithful, they will be fully worthy of the crown that will await them, be sure of that.What about asexuals? Would they be more highly regarded? Not trying to be snarky.
I will requote what St. Thomas wrote to spare you from scrolling up this thread (just substitute “asexual” for “cold-blooded”:What about asexuals? Would they be more highly regarded? Not trying to be snarky.
Please see SerraSemper’s posts - particularly post #95. I believe SerraSemper has perfectly articulated what I was trying to get across.Really? Please show us where Catholic teaching supports this.
Yes, they can. They can not have sex. The physical integrity of the body does not map one-to-one onto female virgins, so the point is irrelevant anyway.
For men, it is called celibacy. There is an obvious difference between men and women. What is not clear is why you are saying that the Church gives specific and unique honor to consecrated virgins, but not to consecrated celibates who are not part of Holy Orders. Obviously, consecrated virginity is reserved for females, while consecrated celibacy is reserved for males, with the theological underpinnings that result. What is not clear is that female virgins are valued particularly more than male celibates. If that is not what you are saying, then my apologies.
Please demonstrate that for all female virgins physical integrity – which they may not have – is particularly valued.
Qua woman, but that has nothing to do with physicality.