John B. writes,
I'm a regular reader of your blog and I've written very occasionally, but not for a few years. Here's another comment.I enjoy your periodic return to the question of whether one can philosophize one's way to a release from philosophy. But I think that, to split hairs, you're wrong to say that one can't copulate one's way to chastity. After a manner of speaking, one can. It's true that one can't copulate one's way to virginity . . . . But isn't "copulating one's way to chastity" at the heart of marriage as the remedium concupiscentiae? When the Apostle Paul tells his readers that it is better to marry than to burn with lust, he seems to have in mind something like copulating one's way to chastity.Think of a bachelor who has unruly sexual desires, some of which he may act on. He then falls in love and gets married, agreeing to an exclusive sexual relationship with his wife. Over the course of his marriage, his inclinations are tamed and re-structured so that, while he may still experience fleeting moments where, sure, he notices that another woman is very pretty, his sexual desire as such is exclusively, or nearly exclusively, for his wife, whom he loves more and more. Actually having frequent sexual intercourse with his wife is part of this transformation, since having sex with the same partner, in the context of a loving relationship, has powerful psychological effects. It might be an oversimplification to say that the man in question "copulated his way to chastity," but it would also be an oversimplification to say that he didn't.Take that for whatever it's worth, and keep up the good work.
I see your point, John, but if the question is whether one can achieve chastity by sexual intercourse, I would say no. One cannot copulate one's way to chastity either in marriage or outside of marriage. But if the question is whether being married helps one avoid unchastity, the answer is a resounding yes. And that, I take it, is the point you succeeded in making. Marriage channels and directs sexual energy in a licit and productive way even if no procreation results. It is therefore indeed remedium concupiscentiae. We need the remedy and the mitigation. We are naturally concupiscent from the ground up, and the decadent, sex-saturated society we live in exacerbates the natural tendency, pouring gasoline on the "fire down below."
The logically prior question is: what is chastity? "Chastity is the virtue which [either] excludes or moderates the indulgence of the sexual appetite." (Catholic Encyclopedia, here.) It is a form of temperance, one of the four cardinal virtues. Chastity is either absolute or relative depending on whether it excludes indulgence in the sexual appetite or merely moderates it. Absolute chastity is called continence and is classed as a "counsel of perfection." As such, it is not morally obligatory but supererogatory. The supererogatory is that which is good but above and beyond what is morally required. Absolute chastity is not required of those in the marital state; relative chastity is. So the exercise of the virtue of chastity is compatible with at least some forms of the indulgence of sexual appetite in marriage.
Chastity in marriage is extremely difficult to achieve. Who would have the temerity to claim that he has achieved it on a regular basis? It is obviously not enough to refrain from sexual relations with partners other than one's spouse. Suppose you are having sexual intercourse with your wife while thinking lustful thoughts about your neighbor's wife. That would count as a violation of chastity in marriage. Am I right about that, John?
Moral collapse has proceeded so far that discussions such as the above will strike the majority as quaint and absurd and out of all relation to anything 'real.' When the Pope allows a 'devout Catholic' supporter of abortion on demand for any reason at any stage of fetal development to receive Holy Communion in Rome, then we are fast approaching the end.
Recent Comments