Main  Contacts  
Table of contents
PREFACE
THE MOTHER AND HER CHILD-1.1
THE MOTHER AND HER CHILD-1.2
THE MOTHER AND HER CHILD-1.3
THE MOTHER AND HER CHILD-1.4
THE MOTHER AND HER CHILD-1.5
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.1
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.2
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.3
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.4
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.5
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.6
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.7
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.8
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.9
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.10
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.11
SEXUAL EDUCATION AND NAKEDNESS-3.1
SEXUAL EDUCATION AND NAKEDNESS-3.2
SEXUAL EDUCATION AND NAKEDNESS-3.3
SEXUAL EDUCATION AND NAKEDNESS-3.4
THE VALUATION OF SEXUAL LOVE-4.1
THE VALUATION OF SEXUAL LOVE-4.2
THE VALUATION OF SEXUAL LOVE-4.3
THE VALUATION OF SEXUAL LOVE-4.4
THE FUNCTION OF CHASTITY-5.1
THE FUNCTION OF CHASTITY-5.2
THE FUNCTION OF CHASTITY-5.3
THE FUNCTION OF CHASTITY-5.4
THE FUNCTION OF CHASTITY-5.5
THE FUNCTION OF CHASTITY-5.6
THE PROBLEM OF SEXUAL ABSTINENCE-6.1
THE PROBLEM OF SEXUAL ABSTINENCE-6.2
THE PROBLEM OF SEXUAL ABSTINENCE-6.3
THE PROBLEM OF SEXUAL ABSTINENCE-6.4
THE PROBLEM OF SEXUAL ABSTINENCE-6.5
THE PROBLEM OF SEXUAL ABSTINENCE-6.6
PROSTITUTION-7.1
PROSTITUTION-7.2
PROSTITUTION-7.3
PROSTITUTION-7.4
PROSTITUTION-7.5
PROSTITUTION-7.6
PROSTITUTION-7.7
PROSTITUTION-7.8
PROSTITUTION-7.9
PROSTITUTION-7.10
PROSTITUTION-7.11
PROSTITUTION-7.12
PROSTITUTION-7.13
PROSTITUTION-7.14
PROSTITUTION-7.15
FOOTNOTES-1
FOOTNOTES-2

treatise (_Liber de eo quod Christus ex Virgine natus est_) to prove that 

Mary really gave birth to Jesus through her sexual organs, and not, as 

some high-strung persons were beginning to think could alone be possible, 

through the more conventionally decent breasts. The sexual organs were 

sanctified. "Spiritus sanctus ... et thalamum tanto dignum sponso 

sanctificavit et portam" (Achery, _Spicilegium_, vol. i, p. 55). 

 

[52] _Paedagogus_, lib. ii, cap. X. Elsewhere (id., lib. ii, Ch. VI) he 

makes a more detailed statement to the same effect. 

 

[53] See, e.g., Wilhelm Capitaine, _Die Moral des Clemens von 

Alexandrien_, pp. 112 et seq. 

 

[54] _De Civitate Dei_, lib. xxii, cap. XXIV. "There is no need," he says 

again (id., lib. xiv, cap. V) "that in our sins and vices we accuse the 

nature of the flesh to the injury of the Creator, for in its own kind and 

degree the flesh is good." 

 

[55] St. Augustine, _De Civitate Dei_, lib. xiv, cap. XXIII-XXVI. 

Chrysostom and Gregory, of Nyssa, thought that in Paradise human beings 

would have multiplied by special creation, but such is not the accepted 

Catholic doctrine. 

 

[56] W. Capitaine, _Die Moral des Clemens von Alexandrien_, pp. 112 et 

seq. Without the body, Tertullian declared, there could be no virginity 

and no salvation. The soul itself is corporeal. He carries, indeed, his 

idea of the omnipresence of the body to the absurd. 

 

[57] Rufinus, _Commentarius in Symbolum Apostolorum_, cap. XII. 

 

[58] Migne, _Patrologia Graeca_, vol. xxvi, pp. 1170 et seq. 

 

[59] Even in physical conformation the human sexual organs, when compared 

with those of the lower animals, show marked differences (see "The 

Mechanism of Detumescence," in the fifth volume of these _Studies_). 

 

[60] It may perhaps be as well to point out, with Forel (_Die Sexuelle 

Frage_, p. 208), that the word "bestial" is generally used quite 

incorrectly in this connection. Indeed, not only for the higher, but also 

for the lower manifestation of the sexual impulse, it would usually be 

more correct to use instead the qualification "human." 

 

[61] _Loc. cit._, _Archives d'Anthropologie Criminelle_, Jan., 1907. 

 

[62] It has, however, become colored and suspect from an early period in 

the history of Christianity. St. Augustine (_De Civitate Dei_, lib. xiv, 

cap. XV), while admitting that libido or lust is merely the generic name 

for all desire, adds that, as specially applied to the sexual appetite, it 

is justly and properly mixed up with ideas of shame. 

 

[63] Hinton well illustrates this feeling. "We call by the name of lust," 

he declares in his MSS., "the most simple and natural desires. We might as 

well term hunger and thirst 'lust' as so call sex-passion, when expressing 

simply Nature's prompting. We miscall it 'lust,' cruelly libelling those 

to whom we ascribe it, and introduce absolute disorder. For, by foolishly 

confounding Nature's demands with lust, we insist upon restraint upon 

her." 

 

[64] Several centuries earlier another French writer, the distinguished 

physician, A. Laurentius (Des Laurens) in his _Historia Anatomica Humani 

Corporis_ (lib. viii, Quaestio vii) had likewise puzzled over "the 

incredible desire of coitus," and asked how it was that "that divine 

animal, full of reason and judgment, which we call Man, should be 

attracted to those obscene parts of women, soiled with filth, which are 

placed, like a sewer, in the lowest part of the body." It is noteworthy 

that, from the first, and equally among men of religion, men of science, 

and men of letters, the mystery of this problem has peculiarly appealed to 

the French mind. 

 

[65] Schopenhauer, _Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung_, vol. ii, pp. 608 


Page 4 from 5:  Back   1   2   3  [4]  5   Forward