Edward Healy Thompson, *The Life and Glories of St. Joseph*, ch. 14 "Joseph's Vow of Virginity", p. 89 states that: >Athanasius spoke these short but weighty words of Joseph and Mary: that “both remained intact, as was proved by many testimonies.”11. *De Incarnatione [*On the Incarnation* ].* I am unable to find this quote in the *De Incarnatione*. Is this a real quote or not?

I am asking this question because the entire comment thread in which I asked the question appears to have gone missing, including references to Aquinas (*Summa Theologica* q. 35 a. 6 ), Ludwig Ott (*Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma* bk. 3, pt. 3, ch. 2, §5, 2.), Pohle (*Mariology* pt. 2, ch. 1, §3, Theses II), and others. Wikipedia lists St. Lucia of Syracuse (283-304) as the patron saint of of the blind within Roman Catholicism. She is venerated, along with St. Agnes (patron saint of virgins) among Roman Catholics, Anglican, Lutheran, and Eastern Orthodox churches. She is one of only 8 women explicitly commemorated by Roman Catholics in the Canon of the Mass. There is, within the tradition regarding St. Lucia, the possibility that she was assigned to defilement within a brothel by the Governor of Syracuse. Paschasius ordered her to burn a sacrifice to the emperor's image. When she refused, Paschasius sentenced her to be defiled in a brothel; a particularly heinous crime against someone who had dedicated her chastity to God. In a question regarding the Catholic tradition that Mary (Jesus' mother) did not suffer pain in childbirth (https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/7451/where-does-the-catholic-tradition-that-mary-did-not-have-pain-giving-birth-to-je?noredirect=1#comment225832_7451) , included in the comments of a particular answer, came the assertion that, even if Lucia was raped and even if she had survived and produced a child from this violation, she would still be honored by name in the Catholic Mass as a martyred virgin even though her bodily integrity was ruined . This was explained as because an intact hymen is accidental to virginity while the commitment of the will is essential to virginity. In other words the taking of sexual liberty by force and against one's will does nothing to impinge upon one's state of virginity even though it may change the state of one's bodily integrity. Therefore the state of one's bodily integrity has nothing to say, directly, to one's virginal condition. The reference to St. Lucia came about as the bodily integrity of Mary (i.e. no ruptured hymen in childbirth) was indicated as integral to her "perpetual virginity" which is in turn linked to her sinlessness which is in turn linked to her painless childbirth. It seems to me, however, that if an intact hymen is accidental to virginity then a ruptured hymen must surely be accidental to the birth of a virginally conceived child. If St. Lucia would still retain her virginal status in the eyes of the Catholic Church regardless of the state of her bodily integrity following rape, why is it so important for Mary's bodily integrity to remain intact as regards her "perpetual" virginity during childbirth?

Deuteronomy 22:13–21 NIV >**13** If a man takes a wife and, after sleeping with her, dislikes her **14** and slanders her and gives her a bad name, saying, “I married this woman, but when I a**strong text**pproached her, I did not find proof of her virginity,” **15** then the young woman’s father and mother shall bring to the town elders at the gate proof that she was a virgin. **16** Her father will say to the elders, “I gave my daughter in marriage to this man, but he dislikes her. **17** Now he has slandered her and said, ‘I did not find your daughter to be a virgin.’ But here is the proof of my daughter’s virginity.” Then her parents shall display the cloth before the elders of the town, **18** and the elders shall take the man and punish him. **19** They shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver and give them to the young woman’s father, because this man has given an Israelite virgin a bad name. She shall continue to be his wife; he must not divorce her as long as he lives. **20** If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the young woman’s virginity can be found, **21** she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done an outrageous thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father’s house. You must purge the evil from among you. This pericope leads to the test of virginity for a woman who has presumably cheated her husband by not being a virgin. According to modern science, this test is unreliable. If God made and knows human anatomy, then how come he put multitude of women at risk by allowing a virginity test which is very unreliable according to modern science.

According to Stéphane-Joseph Piat, O.F.M., *Story of a Family* ch. 3, St. Thérèse of Lisieux 's father Louis Martin >had closely studied the theological value of such a [[virginal] marriage][4] as that of St. Cecilia and that of [Sts. Elzéar de Sabran and Delphine de Glandève ], as witnesses the following note, copied by his own hand at this time, and found among his private papers: >>*Concerning the doctrine of the Church on the Sacrament of Matrimony* >> >>The bond which constitutes this Sacrament is independent of its consummation. We have a striking proof of this truth in the case of the Blessed Virgin and St. Joseph who, although they were truly married, observed perpetual continency. These illustrious spouses have since had as imitators several saints who, living as virgins in the married state, have limited themselves to a perfectly pure union of hearts, renouncing by common consent the physical union which was permitted to them. These marriages contained everything essential to their validity; they had even this advantage over the others that they represented more perfectly the chaste and wholly spiritual union between Jesus Christ and His Church. Has this *Concerning the doctrine of the Church on the Sacrament of Matrimony* (presumably titled *De la doctrine de l'Église sur le sacrement du mariage* in 🇫🇷) been published, as a result of his beatification and canonization process ?

Fr. Ludovic-Marie Barrielle, *Do I Have a Vocation?* , ch. 5, claims: >“A long period of chastity” says Saint Bernard, “is a second virginity.” Where does St. Bernard say this?

St. Maria Goretti was stabbed several times for her refusal to consent to sin against purity; Alessandro Serenelli, her "would-be rapist" (ch. 25 of *Modern Saints: Their Lives and Faces* vol. 1 ), was trying to seduce her. Certainly it is heroic that she would rather die than to consent to sin, but how is she a martyr? I thought martyrs had to die *in odium fidei* (because of hatred of the Faith).

I once saw online that there is a Catholic classification or special private ceremony for women who are chaste and do not engage in any form of sex. This is for women who are not nuns or sisters. Is there such a thing?

A friend of mine who is a Christian made a mistake and lost her virginity before marriage. According to the rules of the Assemblies of God denomination, can she still have a church wedding?

Certain Christians believe Mary was a perpetual virgin. Furthermore, they believe there were Jewish Temple Virgins (discussion on this here ) and that Mary was consecrated as a Temple Virgin. They further believe these Temple Virgins took lifelong vows of chastity. What are the arguments people who believe this make for a **further** practice of Jewish men then marrying these (supposed) Temple Virgins, and then abiding by their (supposed) vows of lifelong chastity?

How did St. Jerome defend the Blessed Virgin's virginity *post partum* in light of Matt. 1:25 , which says St. Joseph "knew her not **till** she brought forth her firstborn son"?

Roman Catholics and Orthodox Christians believe that the blessed Mary remained a perpetual virgin until she sadly passed away, but what was the Early Church Fathers view on the perpetual virginity of Mary? I am looking for early evidence within the early church, if there exists any.

P. Lafetur, O.P., in *The Virtues and States of Life* by A. M. Henry, O.P. (1957), p. 583 says: >[…] loss of virginity make the consecration to God which follows it something different from that of virginity. This is so true that **a special congregation was to receive into the contemplative life those persons whom the sin** (not only against the sixth commandment, but especially that sin) **had touched**. And it has been correctly observed that even those persons whose disgrace had remained completely secret felt more at ease in communities of this kind than in monasteries established principally for virgins. What are these "special [religious] congregations" of non-virgins? Fr. Lafetur doesn't seem to be referring to a congregation of the sort as the [Congregation for Religious](https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/dictionary/index.cfm?id=32737) , but to religious communities.

The United States Association of Consecrated Virgins says the following about their sacramental: > The Consecration of a Virgin is one of the oldest sacramentals in the Church, and one of the fruits of Vatican II was the restoration of this profound blessing on virgins living in the world. The promulgation of this restored Rite for women living in the world was on 31 May 1970. What was the impetus for restoring the Consecration of a Virgin for women living in the world? As it says, this is an old practice, but seems to have fallen out of favor after a time, so I'm curious as to why it came back.

Did any Catholic theologians think that the prophecy of Is. 7:14 ("Behold a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and his name shall be called Emmanuel.") inspired the Blessed Virgin to take a vow of virginity?

Before the Annunciation by St. Gabriel, did Mary desire to be the Mother of the prophesied Messiah?

How did the Gospel writers know that Mary was a virgin? Did they ask her directly, consult Roman census records (if they even recorded whether one was a virgin or not), or find out from another source?

Nun in the churches are virgins till death. And normal women marries a man. So what is will be the difference in reward after they die. And reach heaven.

In Catholicism, marriage is a sacrament, so why isn't consecrated virginity a sacrament?

> Genesis 4:1 Now the man had relations with his wife Eve, and she > conceived and gave birth to Cain, and she said, “I have gotten a > manchild with the help of the Lord." Why do some theologians (Aquinas for example, quoting Augustine in Summa Theologica 1, Q98, article 2) take this to mean sexual relations for the first time when it is equally plausible for it to refer to: 1. the first sexual relations that resulted in conception, or 1. the first sexual relations that resulted in conception and birth of a male child

In Against Heresies (book 3, chapter 22) Irenaeus attempts to draw a comparison between Eve and Mary similar to the comparison Paul draws between Adam and Christ. He says that Mary obeyed in a state of virginity > But Eve was disobedient; for she did not obey when as yet she was a > virgin. And that Eve, having been disobedient, was made the cause of death to the entire human race and Mary, obeying in the same state of virginity, became the cause of salvation for the entire human race. Hosts of questions come to mind but this specific question is: Is there biblical ground to claim that *Genesis 2:25 "And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed."* means that they had not yet had moral and lawful intercourse as man and wife (as Irenaeus asserts) even though the command to have intercourse came before the fall?