QUESTION IV. Whether, in the state of innocence, the integrity of the female genital would have been corrupted by the union with the man and the reception of the virile seed.¹

QVAESTIO IIII. An in statu innocentiae integritas foeminei genitalis ex commistione viri & receptione seminis virilis corrupta esset.

And Augustine indeed writes thus in that place: “In so great a facility of things and felicity of men, far be it that we should suspect that offspring could not be made without the disease of lust: but those members would be moved by the same nod of the will as the others, and without the enticing goad of ardor, with tranquillity of mind and body, with no corruption of integrity, the husband would be poured into the lap of the wife. For it is not, because it cannot be proved by experience, therefore not to be believed; since a turbid heat would not move those parts of the body, but a spontaneous power would apply them as need required. So then the virile seed could be sent into the womb of the spouse, the integrity of the female genital being safe — just as now, that same integrity being safe, the flux of menstrual blood can be emitted from a virgin's womb. For by the same way it could be injected, by which this can be ejected. For as, for giving birth, not a groan of pain but the impulse of maturity would relax the female viscera, so, for impregnating and conceiving, not the appetite of lust but a voluntary use would join the two natures.” Thus Augustine.³

Et Augustinus quidem sic eo loci scribit: In tanta facilitate rerum & felicitate hominum, absit vt suspicemur non potuisse prolem fieri sine libidinis morbo: sed eo voluntatis nutu mouerentur illa membra quo caetera, & sine ardoris illecebroso stimulo, cum tranquillitate animi & corporis, nulla corruptione integritatis infunderetur gremio maritus vxoris. Neque enim quia experientia probari non potest, ideo credendum non est; quando illas corporis partes non ageret turbidus calor, sed spontanea potestas sicut opus esset adhiberet. Ita tunc potuisse vtero coniugis salua integritate foeminei genitalis virile semen immitti, sicut nunc potest, eadem integritate salua, ex vtero virginis fluxus menstrui cruoris emitti. Eadem quippe via posset illud iniici, qua hoc potest eiici. Vt enim ad pariendum non doloris gemitus, sed maturitatis impulsus foeminea viscera relaxaret, sic ad foetandum & concipiendum non libidinis appetitus, sed voluntarius vsus naturam vtramque coniungeret. Haec Augustinus.

[...would be poured into the lap] of the wife, the husband”: and he recalls the rest of Augustine's words, which we set down a little before.⁵

[...infunderetur gremio] maritus vxoris: memorátque caetera Augustini verba, quae paulò ante posuimus.

[...another is the] emission of seed, bringing a sensible delight; the third is the purpose of enjoying that delight. In these three, the first relates to the moral act accidentally, since it is not considered in itself except according to the things of the soul; the second relates to the moral act materially, because sensible passions are the matter of moral acts; but the third relates formally and completively, because the nature of moral acts is completed in that which belongs to reason. Since, therefore, virginity contains the removal of the aforesaid corruption, it follows that the integrity of the bodily member relates accidentally to virginity; but the privation of delight, which consists in the emission of seed, relates materially; and finally the purpose of perpetually abstaining from such delight relates formally and completively in virginity. Therefore, since the two latter [elements], which hold the prior parts in virginity, are excluded by the [act...] [continues]⁷

[...alterum est ipsa] resolutio seminis sensibilem delectationem afferens; tertium est propositum fruendi ea delectatione. In his tribus, primum quidem per accidens se habet ad actum moralem, quippe qui non consideratur per se nisi secundùm ea quae sunt animi; alterum verò materialiter se habet ad actum moralem, propterea quòd sensibiles passiones materia sunt actuum moralium; tertium verò habet se formaliter & completiuè, quia ratio moralium actuum in eo quod est rationis completur. Cùm igitur virginitas contineat remotionem praedictae corruptionis, consequens est integritatem membri corporalis per accidens se habere ad virginitaté; ipsam autem priuationem delectationis, quae consistit in seminis resolutione, habere se materialiter; denique ipsum propositum perpetuò abstinendi à tali delectatione, habere se formaliter & completiuè in virginitate. Ergo cùm duo posteriora, quae priores partes tenent in virginitate, excludat [actus...]

But indeed, Bonaventure, interpreting Augustine's opinion in a favorable sense, in the second [book] of the Sentences, distinction 20, question 4, writes in this manner: “It must be understood that ‘corruption of integrity’ says three things, [namely...] [continues]¹⁰

SED enim, Bonauentura sententiam Augustini bonam in partem interpretans in 2. Sententiarum, distinctione 20. quaestione 4. hoc modo scribit: Intelligendum est quod integritatis corruptio tria dicit, [scilicet...]

[...It must be understood that ‘corruption of integrity’ says three things, namely] the opening of the womanly enclosures, a penal passion, and a foul delight: of which the first is of nature, the second is a penalty, but the third is the vicious part of corruption, which holds the middle between fault and penalty. If, therefore, a man had known his wife at the time appointed by nature, there would have been there the opening of the enclosures, yet there would not have been there a penal passion, nor a foul delight, because the generative power would then be neither corrupted nor infected; rather, those members would obey reason, as Augustine says, just as the mouth, the hand, and the tongue obey. Whence, as the hand and the mouth are opened and closed, and it is not a passion or a penalty, nor a foul delight, so it would have been then concerning those members; nor would it have been baser then to speak of those members than [it would have been to speak of others...] [continues]¹¹

[...Intelligendum est quod integritatis corruptio tria dicit, scilicet] claustrorum muliebrium apertionem, poenalem passionem, & foedam delectationem: quorum primum est naturae, alterum est poena, tertium verò est corruptionis vitiosa quae medium tenet inter culpam & poenam. Si igitur vir cognouisset vxorem in tempore instituta natura, fuisset ibi claustrorum apertio, non tamen ibi fuisset poenalis passio, nec foeda delectatio, quia vis generatiua nec esset tunc corrupta nec infecta, immo obedirent rationi illa membra, vt dicit Augustinus, sicut obediunt os, manus & lingua. Vnde sicut manus & os aperitur & clauditur, nec est passio vel poena, nec delectatio foeda, sic fuisset tunc circa ista membra; nec turpius fuisset tunc loqui de istis membris quàm [fuisset loqui de aliis...]

[...than it would have been to speak of others]; for now it is base to speak of them, on account of this, that nature shudders and blushes at that act by reason of the foulness which is in it.” Thus Bonaventure.¹²

[...quàm fuisset loqui de aliis], nunc enim turpe est loqui propter hoc quod natura horret & erubescit actum illum ratione foeditatis quae in ipso consistit. Haec Bonauentura.