Purity from fleshly lust. In men it is termed continence.
See CONTINENCE.
There is a chastity of speech, behaviour, and imagination, as well as of body. Grove gives us the following rules for the conservation of chastity.
1. To keep ourselves fully employed in labours either of the body or the mind: idleness is frequently the introduction to sensuality.
2. To guard the senses, and avoid every thing which may be an incentive to lust. Does the free use of some meats and drinks make the body ungovernable? Does reading certain books debauch the imagination and inflame the passions? Do temptations often enter by the sight? Have public plays, dancings, effeminate music, idle songs, loose habits, and the like, the same effect? He who resolves upon chastity cannot be ignorant what his duty is in all these and such like cases.
3. to implore the Divine Spirit, which is a spirit of purity; and by the utmost regard to his presence and operations to endeavour to retain him with us. Grove’s Moral Philos. p. 2. sec. 6.
(Lat. castitas), in the Christian sense, denotes (1.) freedom from impure thoughts, desires, or imaginations; and (2.) abstinence from illicit sexual intercourse. It requires a control of the passions and of the imagination to a degree which no system of morals, except the Christian, has ever succeeded in securing. The love of God in the heart is the only sure safeguard against evil lusts. The body, in Christian ethics, is "the temple of the Holy Ghost." But, apart from pure religious life, a strict morality may do a great deal toward securing purity, if not of heart, at least of life. The evil consequences of sexual disorder should be taught in morals as hindrances to lust. Among them is the certainty that domestic happiness, as well as the physical and mental health of the criminal, are endangered by it. Chastity is the noblest result of pure morality, or of the free mastery of spiritual elevation and purity over the natural instincts; it protects liberty from sinking into subjection to the flesh, so far only, however, as his the result of virtue, not of a natural indifference arising from temperament. The best sources of chastity are, first, the true fear of God, which leads to avoid offending God by a sinful misuse of the noblest force of nature, and disturbing the divine law of human reproduction by beastly indulgences; secondly, education, inculcating honesty, modesty, and morality; thirdly, active occupation both of mind and body; fourth, moderation in the use of drink and spices.
Chastity is highly blessed in its results, for from it result the purity of the soul, the liberty of the will, the preservation of health and strength, and freedom from the difficulties and misfortunes which unchastity entails on its unfortunate victims. It is also the seal of a high mind, a true virtue, and a sincere fear of God (Mar 7:21-22; Rom 13:13, Let us walk honestly, as in the day: not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying; 2Co 6:4; 2Co 6:6; Gal 5:19-22; 1Co 7:5, Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency; Php 4:8; 1Ti 4:12; 1Ti 5:2; Tit 1:8; Tit 2:5; 1Pe 1:22; 1Pe 3:2, While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear; 4:3, For the time past of our life may suffice us to have wrought the will of the Gentiles, when we walked in lasciviousness, lusts, excess of wine, revellings, banquetings, and abominable idolatries; Jas 3:17). He who is under the guidance of divine wisdom is essentially chaste (Jas 4:8). Those who are
By: Kaufmann Kohler, David Philipson
Purity in regard to the relations of sex, implied in the commandment, "Ye shall be holy: for I the Lord your God am holy" (Lev. xix. 2). The ancient Semitic religions gave a prominent place to the adoration of those powers in nature which either fertilize or produce; the worship of the sexual was prominent in their cults; and ritual prostitution was a recognized and wide-spread institution (Kalisch, commentary to Lev. i. 312, 358-361; ii. 430). The gods were male and female; sexual intercourse was part of the rites at the shrines of Baal and Astarte in Phenicia and at similar sanctuaries elsewhere. This unchastity in the religious institutions naturally affected the relations of social life; and sexual purity was regarded as of little moment. Possibly in no way were the religious and domestic institutions of Israel more markedly differentiated from those of the surrounding peoples than by the stress laid upon the virtue of chastity. The conception of the God of Israel as the Holy One meant, first of all, purity—purity in worship, and hence also in life.
Before mentioning the special laws of the Pentateuch on this subject, attention must be called to the general statement addressed to the people in Lev. xviii. 3-5, which may be considered the basis of the legislation: "After the doings of the land of Egypt, wherein ye dwelt, shall ye not do; and after the doings of the land of Canaan, whither I bring you, shall ye not do: neither shall ye walk in their statutes. My judgments shall ye do, and my statutes shall ye keep, to walk therein: I am the Lord your God. Ye shall therefore keep my statutes and my judgments: which if a man do he shall live in them: I am the Lord." Hereupon follow the laws of chastity which were to be observed if the people were to avoid the doings of the lands of Egypt and Canaan. These laws of chastity, enumerated in this chapter and in other sections of the Pentateuch, concern (1) the religious and (2) the social-domestic life.
The Religious Life: Ḳadesh and Ḳedeshah.
The "ḳadesh" and the "ḳedeshah," the male and female prostitutes "consecrated" to the worship of the goddess of fertility, were recognized adjuncts of the Canaanitish cults (I Kings xiv. 24, xv. 12, xxii. 47; Amos ii. 7; Hosea iv. 14; Ezek. xxiii. 36; see also the Baal-peor incident referred to in Num. xxv. 1-4 and Hosea ix. 10). This might not be in Israel; for it was "an abomination of the Lord thy God" (Deut. xxiii. 18, 19; see also Lev. xix. 29).
The Social-Domestic Life:
(a) The purity of the maid was safeguarded (Lev. xix. 29); and, in case of wrong-doing on the part of the man, rectification and indemnification were commanded (Ex. xxii. 15, 16; Deut. xxii. 28, 29). (b) Adultery was most stringently forbidden and punished (Ex. xx. 14; Lev. xviii. 20, xx. 10). "They shall both of them die . . . the man . . . and the woman; so shalt thou put away evil" (Deut. xxii. 22). A betrothed woman was regarded in the same light as a married woman, and was punished for adultery, as was also the man found with her (Deut. xxii. 23, 24; see, however, verses 25-28 for the modification of the punishment). Here must be mentioned the peculiar institution of the investigation of the Soṭah, the woman suspected by her husband of adultery, as detailed in Num. v. (c) The Forbidden Degrees of consanguinity are set forth in circumstantial detail (Lev. xviii. 8-18; xx. 11, 12, 14, 17, 21; Deut. xxvii. 20, 22, 23). (d) No woman was to be approached during the period of her uncleanness (Lev. xviii. 19). See Niddah. (e) The unnatural crimes against chastity, sodomy and pederasty, prevalent in heathendom, were strictly prohibited (Lev. xviii. 22, 23; xx. 13, 15, 16; Deut. xxvii. 21).
The sins against chastity were the particular abominations, the commission of which by the former inhabitants had caused the land to become unclean (Lev. xviii. 27). No wrong-doing, excepting idolatry, is more constantly and vehemently forbidden. Four out of the twelve curses which are pronounced in the chapter of curses in the Book of Deuteronomy (xxvii. 20-23) are directed against this vice in one or other of its forms. The Biblical attitude in this matter is perhaps best expressed in the story of Joseph, who, when tempted by Potiphar's wife, refused with the noble words: "How can I do this great wickedness and sin against God?" (Gen. xxxix. 9.) Unchastity was primarily a sin against God, the pure and holy.
In the Historical Books.
In the historical books of the Bible occasional passages indicate how clearly it was understood that chastity was an indispensable virtue. When Shechem, the son of Hamor, defiled Dinah, the sons of Jacob declared it a villainy (A. V., "folly") in Israel which ought not to be committed; and Simeon and Levi slew all the males of Shechem, saying to Jacob, when he rebuked them for their revengeful act: "Should he deal with our sister as with an harlot?" (Gen. xxxiv. 7, 31.) The one misdemeanor of Eli's two wicked sons that is mentioned by name is unchastity (I Sam. ii. 22). In Amnon's act of violence against Tamar she begs him to desist, "for no such thing ought to be done in Israel" (II Sam. xiii. 12). Among the sins of Judah in the reign of Rehoboam was that of ritual unchastity (I Kings xiv. 24), on account of which calamity came upon the kingdom (see also II Kings xiii. 6, xvii. 16, xviii. 4, xx. 1, 3, xxii. 4; II Chron. xxviii. 3, xxxiii. 3, xxxvi. 14). The Prophets laid the greatest stress upon chastity. Their condemnation of unchastity ranks among the most pronounced of their denunciations of the evils prevalent in their days (Amos ii. 7; Hosea iv. 2, 13, 14; Isa. lvii. 3; Jer. ix. 1; xxiii. 10, 14; xxix. 23; Ezek. xvi. 38; xviii. 6; xxii. 10, 11; xxiii. 48; xxxiii. 26). There is a further indication of the high esteem in which chastity was held in the fact that these prophets, in speaking of the punishment that would befall the people for their sins, mentionthe deflowering of the women by their captors, which evil would not have been considered as so dreadful had not chastity been regarded in the highest light (Isa. xiii. 16; Zech. xiv. 2; Lam. v. 11; see also Amos vii. 17).
In the Talmud.
The many admonitions in the Book of Proverbs against unchastity need but be adverted to for proof of the lofty place that the pure life held in the estimation of the wise men of Israel (Prov. v. 3-23, vi. 24-33, vii. 5-27, ix. 13-18, xxxi. 3). "I made a covenant with mine eyes; why then should I look upon a maid?" says Job (xxxi. 1). Similar are the injunctions of the later sage Ben Sira (Ecclus. ix. 3-9; xix. 2; xxiii. 22-26; xlii. 11), who counseled, "Go not after 'thy lusts'; and restrain thyself from thine appetites" (ib. xviii. 30). The spirit of the Rabbis appears in the advice of Jose ben Johanan, "Prolong not converse with woman" (Abot i. 5). "Follow not after your own eyes, after which ye use to go," etc. (Num. xv. 39): this means, "Ye shall not cast a lustful glance upon woman." One of the reasons given for the destruction of Jerusalem is the prevalence of "shamelessness," which undoubtedly means unchastity (Shab. 119b). In the days of the terrible persecutions under Hadrian the rabbis advised the people to suffer death rather than be guilty of "idolatry, incest, or bloodshed"; while they considered the transgression of any other commandment permissible if necessary to preserve life (Sanh. 74a; see also Maimonides, "Yad," Yesode ha-Torah, v. 9). As a further example of the attitude of the rabbis of Talmudic times, may be quoted the passage which was given as advice what to do when unchaste thoughts and desires assail: "My son, if that monster [the Yeẓer Hara'] meets you, drag it to the house of study; it will melt if it is of iron; it will break in pieces if it is of stone, as is said in Scripture (Jer. xxiii. 29): 'Is not my word like as a fire? saith the Lord; and like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces?'" (Ḳid. 30b.) The Talmudic term for chastity is 
. There can be no doubt of the fact that early marriage among the Jews was a strong factor in making them so chaste a people. Even such an unsympathetic and hostile exponent of rabbinic theology as Weber indicates this ("Jüd. Theol." p. 234). The age of eighteen was posited as the proper time for a youth to contract matrimony (Abot v. 21; Ḳid. 29b; Yeb. 62b, 63b; Sanh. 76b; Shulḥan 'Aruk, Eben ha-'Ezer, 1, 2). Early marriages continued in vogue among the Jews through medieval times (Abrahams, "Jewish Life in the Middle Ages," pp. 90, 167). Many enactments were made to safeguard the purity of the people and to insure chastity (Maimonides, "Yad," Issure Biah, xxi.; Shulḥan 'Aruk, Eben ha-'Ezer, 21-25).
In one of the sections of the "reasons for the commandments" ("ta'ame miẓwot") in his "Moreh Nebukim," Maimonides gives as the reason for such legislation the following: "The object of these precepts is to diminish sexual intercourse, to restrain as much as possible indulgence in lust, and [to teach] that this enjoyment does not, as foolish people think, include in itself its final cause" ("Moreh Nebukim," iii. 35; see also ibid. 33). In ch. xlix. he treats at length the law concerning forbidden sexual intercourse and that for the promotion of chastity, whose object is "to inculcate the lesson that we ought to limit sexual intercourse hold it in contempt, and only desire it rarely."
In speaking of the reason for the prohibition of intermarriage with a near relative, he expresses it as his opinion that one object of this is "to inculcate chastity in our hearts."
Views of the Philosophers.
Of ethical philosophers who have expressed Jewish thought on this subject, Saadia and Baḥya may be mentioned. The former, in the tenth chapter of his "Emunot we-De'ot," which is the ethical portion of the book, devotes two paragraphs to chastity; the third is "on sexual intercourse," and the fourth "on desire." His teaching concerning intercourse is "that it is not good for man, except for the purpose of producing offspring"; concerning desire, "man shall have no desire except for his wife, that he may love her and she may love him" ("Emunot we-De'ot," ed. Slucki, pp. 150, 151). In his ethical treatise, "The Duties of the Heart," Baḥya has frequent admonitions on the necessity of chastity and the overcoming of evil desires; as, for example, in the fifth division of the work, notably pp. 254, 258 et seq. (ed. Stern, Vienna, 1856). At the close of ch. ix. he quotes with approval and at length the last will and testament of a certain pious man in Israel, addressed to his son, and containing advice for the guidance of life. From this document one sentence may be set down here: "Be not one of those who, sunk in the folly of drunkenness and lust, submit like slaves to the dominance of evil passions; so that they think only of the satisfaction of sensual desires and the indulgence of bestial pleasures" (ib. p. 433). A similar word of advice may be quoted from a letter written by Naḥmanides to his son: "Be especially careful to keep aloof from women. Know that our God hates immorality; and Balaam could in no other way injure Israel than by inciting them to unchastity" (Schechter, "Studies in Judaism," p. 141).
A few further like injunctions from the moral treatises of medieval rabbis may here be given: "Let not the strange god, thy sensual desire, rule over thee; act so that thou hast not cause to blush before thyself; pay no heed to the biddings of desire; sin not and say, I will repent later" (from "Sefer Roḳeaḥ" by R. Eleazer b. Judah of Worms, in Zunz, "Z. G." pp. 132, 134); "Keep thy soul always pure: thou knowest not when thou wilt have to give it up" ("Sefer ha-Middot," fifteenth century, in ib. p. 153).
CHASTITY.—See Crimes and Punishments, and Marriage.
In this article chastity is considered as a virtue; its consideration as an evangelical counsel will be found in the articles on CELIBACY OF THE CLERGY, CONTINENCY, and VIRGINITY. As a vow, chastity is discussed in the article VOW. AS A VIRTUEChastity is the virtue which excludes or moderates the indulgence of the sexual appetite. It is a form of the virtue of temperance, which controls according to right reason the desire for and use of those things which afford the greatest sensual pleasures. The sources of such delectation are food and drink, by means of which the life of the individual is conserved, and the union of the sexes, by means of which the permanence of the species is secured. Chastity, therefore, is allied to abstinence and sobriety; for, as by these latter the pleasures of the nutritive functions are rightly regulated, so by chastity the procreative appetite is duly restricted. Understood as interdicting all carnal pleasures, chastity is taken generally to be the same as continency, though between these two, Aristotle, as pointed out in the article on CONTINENCY, drew a marked distinction. With chastity is often confounded modesty, though this latter is properly but a special circumstance of chastity or rather, we might say, its complement. For modesty is the quality of delicate reserve and constraint with reference to all acts that give rise to shame, and is therefore the outpost and safeguard of chastity. It is hardly necessary to observe that the virtue under discussion may be a purely natural one. As such, its motive would be the natural decency seen in the control of the sexual appetite, according to the norm of reason. Such a motive springs from the dignity of human nature, which, without this rational sway, is degraded to brutish levels. But it is more particularly as a supernatural virtue that we would consider chastity. Viewed thus, its motives are discovered in the light of faith. These are particularly the words and example of Jesus Christ and the reverence that is owing to the human body as the temple of the Holy Ghost, as incorporated into that mystic body of which Christ is the head, as the recipient of the Blessed Eucharist, and finally, as destined to share hereafter with the soul a life of eternal glory. According as chastity would exclude all voluntary Carnal pleasures, or allow this gratification only within prescribed limits, it is known as absolute or relative. The former is enjoined upon the unmarried, the latter is incumbent upon those within the marriage state. The indulgence of the sexual appetite being prohibited to all outside of legitimate wedlock, the wilful impulse to it in the unmarried, like the wilful impulse to anything unlawful, is forbidden. Moreover, such is the intensity of the sexual passion that this impulse is perilously apt to bear away the will before it. Hence, when wilful, it is a grave offence of its very nature. It must be observed too, that this impulse is constituted, not merely by an effective desire, but by every voluntary impure thought. Besides the classification already given, there is another, according to which chastity is distinguished as perfect, or imperfect. The first-mentioned is the virtue of those who, in order to devote themselves more unreservedly to God and their spiritual interests, resolve to refrain perpetually from even the licit pleasures of the marital state. When this resolution is made by one who has never known the gratification allowed in marriage, perfect chastity becomes virginity. Because of these two elements — the high purpose and the absolute inexperience — just referred to, virginal chastity takes on the character of a special virtue distinct from that which connotes abstinence merely from illicit carnal pleasure. Nor is it necessary that the resolution implied in virginity be fortified by a vow, though as practised ordinarily and in the most perfect manner, virginal chastity, as St. Thomas following St. Augustine, would imply, supposes a vow. (Summa Theol., II-II, Q. clii, a. 3, ad 4.) The special virtue we are here considering involves a physical integrity. Yet while the Church demands this integrity in those who would wear the veil of consecrated virgins, it is but an accidental quality and may be lost without detriment to that higher spiritual integrity in which formally the virtue of virginity resides. The latter integrity is necessary and is alone sufficient to win the aureole said to await virgins as a special heavenly reward (St. Thomas, Suppl., Q. xcvi, a. 5). Imperfect chastity is that which is proper to the state of those who have not as yet entered wedlock without however having renounced the intention of doing so, of those also who are joined by the bonds of legitimate marriage, and finally of those who have outlived their marital partners. However in the case of those last mentioned the resolution may be taken which obviously would make the chastity practised that which we have defined as the perfect kind. THE PRACTICE OF CHASTITYTo point out the untenableness of the arguments advanced by McLennon, Lubbock, Morgan, Spencer, and others, for an original state of sexual promiscuity among mankind, belongs more immediately to the natural history of marriage. Westermarck, in his "History of Human Marriage" (London, 1891), has clearly shown that many of the representations made of people living promiscuously are false and that this low condition may not be looked upon as characteristic of savages, much less be taken as evidencing an original promiscuity (History of Human Marriage, 61 sqq.). According to this author, "the number of uncivilized peoples among whom chastity, at least as regards women, is held in honour and as a rule cultivated, is very considerable" (op. cit., 66). A fact which cannot be overlooked, of which travellers give unfailing testimony is the pernicious effect, as a rule, upon savages of contact with those who come to them from higher civilization. According to Dr. Nansen, "the Eskimo women of the larger colonies are freer in their ways than those of the small outlying settlements where there are no Europeans" (Nansen, The First Crossing of Greenland, II, 329). Of the tribes of the Adelaide plains of South Australia, Mr. Edward Stephens says: "Those who speak of the natives as a naturally degraded race, either do not speak from experience, or they judge them by what they have become when the abuse of intoxicants and contact with the most wicked of the white race have begun their deadly work. I saw the natives and was much with them before those dreadful immoralities were known and I say it fearlessly that nearly all their evils they owed to the white man’s immorality and to the white man’s drink" (Stephens, The Aborigines of Australia, in Jour. Roy. Soc. N. S. Wales, XXIII, 480). Of the primitive Turko-Tatars, Professor Vambrey observes: "The difference in immorality which exists between the Turks affected by a foreign civilization and kindred tribes inhabiting the steppes becomes very conspicuous to anyone living among the Turkomans and Kara Kalpaks, for whether in Africa or Asia certain vices are introduced only by the so-called bearers of culture" (Vambrey, Die primitive Cultur des Turks tartarischen Volkes, 72). Testimonies to the same effect could be multiplied indefinitely. THE PRACTICE OF CHASTITY AMONG THE JEWSSeveral of the Mosaic ordinances must have operated strongly among the ancient Jews, to prevent sins against chastity. The legislation of Deut., xxii, 20- 21, according to which a bride who had deceived her husband into thinking her a virgin was stoned to death at her father’s door, must in the circumstances have powerfully deterred young women from all impure practices. The effect, too, of the law, Deut., xxii, 28-29, must have been wholesome. According to this enactment, if a man sinned with a virgin "he shall give to the father of the maid fifty sides of silver and shall have her to wife because he hath humbled her. He may not put her away all the days of his life." The Mosaic law against prostitution of Jewish women was severe, nevertheless through foreign women this evil became widespread in Israel. It is to be observed that the Hebrews were ever prone to fall into the sexual sins of their heathen neighbours, and the inevitable result of polygamy was seen in the absence of a recognized obligation of continence in the husband parallel to that imposed on the wife.The unchastity of the post-Homeric Greeks was notorious. With this people marriage was but an institution to supply the State with strong and sturdy soldiers. The consequence of this to the position of women was most baneful. We are told by Polybius that sometimes four Spartans had one wife in common. (Fragm. in Scr. Vet. Nov. Coll., ed. Mai, II, 384.) The Athenians were not so degraded, yet here the wife was excluded from the society of her husband, who sought pleasure in the company of hetairai and concubines. The hetairai were not social pariahs among the Athenians. Indeed many of them attained to the influence of queens. Although the Romans styled excess of debauchery "Græcizing", they nevertheless sounded greater depths of filthy wantonness in the days following the early republic than ever did their eastern neighbours. The Greeks threw a glamour of romance and sentiment about their sexual sins. But with the Romans, immorality, even of the abnormal kind, stalked about, its repulsiveness undisguised. We gather this clearly from the pages of Juvenal, Martial, and Suetonius. Cicero makes the public statement that intercourse with prostitutes had never been a thing condemned in Rome (Pro Cælio, xv), and we know that as a rule marriage was looked upon as a mere temporary relation to be severed directly it became irksome to either party. Never did woman sink to such degradation as in Rome. In Greece the enforced seclusion of the wife acted as a moral protection. The Roman matron was not thus restricted, and many of these of highest social rank did not hesitate in the time of Tiberius to have their names inscribed upon the ædiles’ list as common prostitutes in order thus to escape the penalties which the Julian Law attached to adultery. CHRISTIANITY AND THE PRACTICE OF CHASTITYUnder Christianity chastity has been practised in a manner unknown under any other influence. Christian morality prescribes the right order of relations. It therefore must direct and control the manner of relationship sustained to each other by soul and body. Between these two there is an ineradicable opposition, the flesh with its concupiscences contending unceasingly against the spirit, blinding the latter and weaning it away from the pursuit of its true life. Harmony and due order between these two must prevail. But this means the pre-eminence and mastery of the spirit, which in turn can only mean the castigation of the body. The real as well as the etymological kinship between chastity and chastisement then is obvious. Necessarily, therefore, chastity is a thing stern and austere. The effect of the example as well as of the words of Our Saviour (Matthew 19:11-12) is seen in the lives of the many celibates and virgins who have graced the history of the Christian Church, while the idea of marriage as the sign and symbol of the ineffable union of Christ with His spotless spouse the Church — a union in which fidelity no less than love is mutual — has borne its fruit in beautifying the world with patterns of conjugal chastity.-----------------------------------St. THOMAS, Summa, II-II, Q. cli-clii; Cont. Gent., L. III, c. cxxxvi; LESSIUS, De Just. et jure ceterisque virt. card., L, IV, c. ii, n. 92 sq.; ESCHBACH, Disputationes Physiologico-Theologicœ, Disp. v; DÖLLINGER, The Gentile and the Jew etc., II, Book IX; CRAISSON, De Rebus Venereis; BONAL, De Virtute Castitatis; WESTERMARCK, The History of Human Marriage, ch. iv, v, vi; GAY, The Christian Life and Virtues; II, Chastity.JOHN W. MELODY. Transcribed by Douglas J. Potter Dedicated to the Immaculate Heart of the Blessed Virgin Mary The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume IIICopyright © 1908 by Robert Appleton CompanyOnline Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. KnightNihil Obstat, November 1, 1908. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., CensorImprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York