The City of God

C ...consent to evil. But no magnanimous and chaste person has within their power what is done to their flesh, but only what they assent to or refuse in their mind. Who, in their right mind, would think they have lost their chastity if, perhaps, lust not their own is exercised and satisfied in their seized or oppressed flesh? If chastity is lost in this way, then certainly chastity will not be a virtue of the mind, nor will it pertain to those goods by which one lives well, but it will be numbered among bodily goods—such as strength, beauty, sound and entire health, and anything of this sort, which, even if they are diminished, do not at all diminish a good and just life. But if chastity is such a thing, why is there labor, even with the risk of the body, so that it is not lost? If, however, it is a good of the mind, it is not lost even if the body is oppressed. Furthermore, the good of holy continence, when it does not yield to the uncleanness of carnal desires, sanctifies the body itself; and therefore, it persists with an unshaken intention not to yield to them.

Chastity is not lost from the body itself, because the will to use it holily persists, and as far as it is within its power, the ability as well. For the body is not holy because its members are whole, or because they are not touched by any contact, since they can, through various accidents, suffer violence even when wounded; and physicians, sometimes helping with health, do things there which the sight shudders at. A midwife, while examining the integrity of a certain virgin by hand, whether through malice, ignorance, or accident, destroyed it. I do not think anyone is so foolish as to think that anything has been lost for her, even regarding the holiness of her body, even though the integrity of that member has been lost. Wherefore, with the purpose of the mind remaining, through which the body also merited to be sanctified, the violence of another’s lust does not take away the holiness of the body, which the perseverance of one’s own continence preserves. Or indeed, if some woman, with a corrupted mind and having violated the purpose she vowed to God, proceeds to her deceiver to be corrupted, do we still call her holy in body, since the holiness of the mind through which the body was sanctified has been lost and destroyed? Far be this error. And from this, let us rather be admonished that the holiness of the body is not lost while the holiness of the mind remains, even if the body is oppressed, just as the holiness of the body is lost when the holiness of the mind is violated, even if the body remains intact. For this reason, a woman violently oppressed and seized by another’s sin has nothing for which to punish herself with spontaneous death, as she gave no consent; how much less should she do so before this happens, so that a certain homicide is not committed, since the crime itself, though another’s, still hangs in uncertainty? Will those against whom we defend not only the minds but also the holy bodies of Christian women oppressed in captivity dare to contradict this clear reason—by which we say that when the body is oppressed, provided the purpose of chastity is not changed by any consent to evil, the crime belongs only to him who committed it by oppressing, not to her who, being oppressed, did not consent to the oppressor with any will?

Of Lucretia, who killed herself because of the rape brought upon her. Chap. XIX

Lucretia, certainly, a noble and ancient Roman matron, is praised highly for her chastity. When her body was violently oppressed by the lustful son of King Tarquin, she revealed the crime of the most wicked youth to her husband, Collatinus, and to her kinsman, Brutus, men of great renown and fortitude, and bound them to vengeance. Then, sick and impatient because of the crime committed upon her, she killed herself. What shall we say? Is she to be judged an adulteress or chaste? Who would think it necessary to labor in this controversy? A certain man, declaiming on this, says excellently and truthfully: "A wonder to tell. There were two, and one committed adultery." Splendidly and most truthfully! Looking at the mixture of two bodies, he saw the most polluted desire of the one and the most chaste will of the other; and he did not attend to what was done by the conjunction of limbs, but to what was done by the diversity of minds. "There were two," he said, "and one committed adultery." But why is it that a more grievous vengeance is taken upon her who did not commit adultery? The man was exiled with his father from the fatherland; she was punished with the ultimate penalty. If that is not unchastity, by which she is oppressed against her will, then this is not justice, by which the chaste woman is punished. I appeal to you, Roman laws and judges. Truly, after the crimes are committed, no one...