Virgines Stultae

       It is interesting how Jerome includes in his argument the part of the sermon on the mound in which thought and action are construed as one and the same. The tint of the letter seems to rest more on the virginity of the spirit rather than virginity of the flesh. It reduces the condescending nature of his tone and give the letter more of a precautionary slant. Jerome seems to be less worried that she will literally lose her virginity and more that she will allow her mind to deviate from the precepts of God and the ideals of Jesus. However, he does not include or discuss the aspect of that same part of the sermon on the mound where Jesus says that it is better to remove the offending member of the body than to lose ones soul. Imaginably the intended would know the following part, but it is interesting that Jerome doesn’t make that explicit. I think that because Jerome is linking the ill-fated lust to the mind, rather than Jesus’ attribution to the eye or other more immediate member of the body, that such type of self-mutilating talk would be inappropriate for the context. It would seem that Jerome is rather sermonizing that one should avoid such thoughts or ideas because there isn’t a way to make up for such thoughts. His quote that “there is insufficient supply of good virgins” would further imply that there is not a way to come back from these thoughts. Jerome does say, after all, that there is no way for God to recoup women who have lost their virginity, and since looking with lust at someone is the equivalent to losing virginity, there is no way for a woman who has looked with lust on a man to regain that lost spiritual virginity. Jerome, at the end of section 5, makes it clear that there is no difference as far as virginity is concerned between spiritual (i.e. lustful thoughts) and physical defloration.