460、⒁找一个情人好于游荡的性欲，但前提是它不能涉及数个情人，处女或未失贞的女人，已婚妇女，并与婚姻之爱保持分离。
刚才已指出什么时间、哪种情况下找一个情人好于游荡的性欲。
①之所以只找一个情人，是因为找数个情人有一夫多妻的意味，这会把人带入纯属世的状态，使其深深陷入感官状态，以致他无法被提升至属灵状态，而属灵状态是婚姻之爱所必需的（参看338，339节）。
②之所以不能找少女或处女作情人，是因为对女人来说，婚姻之爱与她们的贞操构成一体。这就是婚姻之爱的贞洁、纯粹和神圣的源头。因此，一个女人将自己的贞操许诺献给一个男人，就是承诺：她会永远爱他。因此，凡有理性的女孩子，都不会轻易同意放弃自己的贞操，除非她得到婚约的承诺。贞操也是她荣耀的王冠，因而没有婚约就夺走她的贞操，然后又甩掉她，就是把一个原本能成为新娘和贞洁妻子的少女变成一个妓女，或去欺骗某个男人，这两种行为都是令人发指的罪行。因此，一个男人若找一个少女作情人，一定要与她共同生活，从而将她引入爱情的友谊，还要有这样不变的意图：只要不犯奸淫，她就应该或要成为他的妻子。
③很明显，不可找已婚妇女作情人，因为这是通奸。
④对找情人的爱必须与婚姻之爱保持分离，因为这是两种截然不同的爱，因而绝不可混淆。事实上，对找情人的爱是一种不贞洁、属世和外在的爱，而对婚姻的爱则是一种贞洁、属灵和内在的爱。对情人的爱会使两人的灵魂分开，仅在身体感官层面将他们联结起来；但是，对婚姻的爱会将两个灵魂联结起来，通过灵魂的联结将身体感官层联结起来，直到他们可以说合二为一，也就是成为一体。
⑤对找情人的爱仅进入理解力和取决于理解力的一切；而对婚姻的爱还进入意愿和取决于意愿的一切，因而进入此人的每一个细节。因此，如果对找情人的爱变成对婚姻的爱，那么这个男人在正当退出时，必会侵犯夫妻的联结。如果他从中退出，并娶了另外一个女人，这种中断就会摧毁婚姻之爱。要知道，对找情人的爱通过不向情人承诺婚姻，或不给她任何婚姻的希望而与婚姻之爱保持分离。然而，与妻子首次点燃性爱的火炬是最好不过的。
460、（14）前面已经讲过那些男人通过与一个情人交往会比乱交好些。
1、与一个情人交往不可以变成与多个情人交往，否则一夫多妻的成份就出现了，使人进入自然状态并且将其拉入到感觉程面上。使得无法进入婚姻之爱所必须的精神状态中。
2、不能将处女当做情人来交往。因为婚姻之爱与女人的贞节是同在的。由它而产生婚姻之爱的纯洁状态。因此若一个女人同意为某个男人献出贞节，她是想要去永远爱他。因此只有在婚姻前提下，女人才可以那么做。贞节是女人的贵冠。因此夺走女人的贞节之后抛弃她就会损害日后可能成为好的妻子的女人。会造成伤害。因此若有人将处女作为情人，他就可能与她相爱，他要怀有将她变成自己的妻子的意愿。
3、情人不能是已婚女人，因为那就构成了通奸。
4、与一个情人之间的爱要与婚姻之爱相区分而不能相混和，因为二者在性质上是不同的。与情人交往的爱是非贞洁的，自然的，外在的爱，而婚姻之爱则是贞洁的，精神性的，内在的爱。与情人的爱会将两个人的灵魂分离，而只是在躯体的感觉上相联系。而婚姻之爱则会使灵魂相联，躯体的感觉相联，最后二者合二为一。
5、与情人之间的爱只会存在于才智及与才智相关的因素中。而婚姻之爱则会存在于人的意志之中，进而进入人的每一部分之中。因此若与情人间的爱变成一种与婚姻中存在的爱一样的爱，男人则不可能在不破坏那一结合的情况下结束那一关系。若他选择结束与情人的关系，而与另一个人结婚，在破坏那一结合的同时，婚姻之爱也就消失了。男人若选择与一个情人交往则要使其与婚姻之爱分离，不要承诺情人要与她结婚，或者使得情人有自己将与其结婚的希望。
尽管以上种种情况的存在，对异性的爱还是产生在与自己的妻子之间才是最为推崇的。
460. (xiv) Having a mistress is preferable to roving lust, so long as it does not involve several mistresses, or a girl or a virgin, or a married woman; and provided it is kept separate from conjugial love.
It was pointed out just above at what time and in which cases having a mistress is preferable to a roving lust.
(a) Only one mistress is to be taken, because there is something polygamous about having several, and this brings a person into a purely natural state and plunges him so deeply in the sensual state that he cannot be raised up to the spiritual state, which is necessary for conjugial love (338-339).
[2] (b) A girl or a virgin is not to be taken as a mistress, because in the case of women conjugial love makes one with their virginity. This then is the source of the chastity, purity and holiness of that love. For a woman therefore to offer and promise her virginity to a man is to give a pledge that she will love him for ever. Consequently no girl can reasonably consent to surrendering her virginity except in return for the promise of a marriage compact. It is also the crown of her honour; so to snatch it from her without a marriage compact and then to throw her off is to turn a girl, who could become a bride and a chaste wife, into a prostitute, or to cheat some man, either of which are heinous crimes. Therefore a man who takes a girl as a mistress can certainly live with her and so introduce her to a loving friendship, but only so long as it is his constant intention that, provided she does not become promiscuous, she should be or become his wife.
[3] (c) It is obvious that a married woman is not to be taken as a mistress, because this is adultery.
[4] (d) The reason why the love of having a mistress must be kept separate from conjugial love is that these are two distinct loves which should therefore not be mixed up. For the love of having a mistress is an unchaste, natural and outward love, and the love for marriage is chaste, spiritual and inward. Love for a mistress keeps the couple's souls apart and links them only at the sensual level of the body; but the love for marriage unites their souls, and as a result the sensual level of the body, until they become as it were one in place of two, that is, one flesh.
[5] (e) The love of having a mistress merely enters the intellect and what depends on it; but the love of marriage also enters the will and what depends on that, so every detail of the person. If therefore love of having a mistress becomes love for marriage, the man cannot rightfully depart from it without violating the marital union. If he does and marries another woman, the break destroys conjugial love. It should be known that the love of having a mistress is kept separate from conjugial love by not promising marriage to a mistress or leading her to have any hope of marriage. It is, however, preferable for the torch of sexual love to be first lit with a wife.
460. 14. Resorting to a courtesan is preferable to promiscuous lust, provided that the arrangement is not made with more than one, or with a virgin or untouched woman, or with a married woman, and that it is kept separate from conjugial love. We have already indicated just above when, and for what men, resorting to a courtesan is preferable to promiscuous lust.
1. An arrangement with a courtesan must not be made with more than one, because with more than one a polygamous element enters, inducing in the person a merely natural state and dragging him down into a sensual one, to the point that he cannot be elevated into a spiritual state, which is necessary for conjugial love (see nos. 338, 339).
[2] 2. The arrangement must not be made with a virgin or untouched woman, because conjugial love in women is coupled with their virginity. From it comes the chastity, purity and sanctity of that love. Consequently, for a woman to promise and commit her virginity to some man is to give a token that she will love him to eternity. Because of that a virgin cannot with any rational assent pledge it except with the promise of a conjugial covenant. It is also the crown of her honor. Therefore to snatch it away without a covenant of marriage and afterwards reject her is to make a trollop of some virgin who might have become a chaste bride and wife, or to cheat some other man, either of which is hurtful. Accordingly, if anyone takes a virgin as a his courtesan, he may indeed cohabit with her and so introduce her into the friendship of love, but still with the constant intention of making her his wife if she is not unfaithful.
[3] 3. An arrangement with a courtesan clearly must not be made with a married woman, because that is adultery.
[4] 4. The love in resorting to a courtesan must be kept separate from conjugial love for the reason that these loves are different in nature and therefore ought not to be mixed together. For the love in resorting to a courtesan is an unchaste, natural and external love, while the love in marriage is chaste, spiritual and internal. The love in resorting to a courtesan divides the souls of the two and joins only the sensual elements of the body, whereas the love in marriage unites their souls, and as a result of the union of their souls, also the sensual elements of the body, until from being two they become as one, which is to say, one flesh.
[5] 5. The love in resorting to a courtesan enters only into the intellect and into such elements as depend on the intellect. But the love in marriage enters also into the will and into such elements as depend on the will, thus into each and every element of the person. Consequently, if the love in resorting to a courtesan becomes the kind of love found in marriage, the man cannot by any right withdraw from the relationship without violating the conjugial union; and if he does withdraw from it, and marries another, in the breaking of that union conjugial love perishes. A man should know that the love in resorting to a courtesan is kept separate from conjugial love by his not promising to marry the courtesan and by his not leading her on into any hope of marriage.
Nevertheless, it is preferable that the torch of love for the opposite sex be kindled for the first time with one's wife.
460. 14. Having a mistress is better than indulging roving passions, if only it is not done with more than one, nor with a virgin or not yet sexually active woman, nor with a married woman, and if it is kept separate from the love in marriage. When and for whom having a mistress is better than indulging wandering· lusts was already pointed out just above.
(a) Having a mistress should not be done with more than one woman because with more than one, something polygamous is in it, which puts a person in a merely worldly state, and puts him into such a sensual state that he can hardly be raised into the spiritual state where married love has to be (see nos. 338-339).
(b) It should not be done with a virgin or woman not yet sexually active because the love of marriage in women is partner to their virginity. This is where that love gets its chastity, purity, and holiness. So for a woman to promise it and to give it up to any man is to give a token that she is going to love him forever. Because of this a young woman cannot hazard it through any reasonable agreement except with the security of a marriage covenant. And it is the crown of her reputation. So to take it away without a marriage covenant and later abandon her is to make a harlot of some virgin who could be a bride and chaste wife, or to defraud some man, and either thing is destructive. Because of this, someone who joins a virgin to himself as a mistress may in fact live with her and in this way introduce her to the friendship of love, but always with a firm intention that she be, or become, his wife if she does not commit adultery.
(c) It is obvious that a married woman should not be a mistress, because that is adultery.
(d) Love with a mistress should be kept separate from married love, because the two loves are different and therefore should not be mixed. For love with a mistress is an unchaste, worldly, and external love, but married love is chaste, spiritual, and internal.
Love with a mistress keeps the two souls apart and joins only the sensory parts of their bodies. But married love unites souls - and from the union of souls the sensual parts of bodies, too - until from two they become like one, which is one flesh. (e) Love with a mistress only enters your intellect and the things that depend on intellect, but married love enters your will and the things that depend on will, therefore each and every thing in the person. So if love with a mistress becomes married love, the man has no right to withdraw without a violation of married union. And if he does go away, and takes another, married love is lost in the break.
Note that love with a mistress is kept separate from married love by not promising the mistress marriage nor leading her to hope for marriage at all.
Still, it is better for the torch of sexual love to be first lighted with a wife.
460. XIV. THAT PELLICACY IS PREFERABLE TO ROAMING LUST PROVIDED IT BE NOT CONTRACTED WITH MANY, NOR WITH A VIRGIN OR UNDEFLOWERED WOMAN, NOR WITH A MARRIED WOMAN; AND PROVIDED IT BE KEPT SEPARATE FROM CONJUGIAL LOVE. When and with whom pellicacy is preferable to roaming lust has been pointed out just above. 1. That pellicacy is not to be contracted with more than one, is because when with many there is in it something polygamous, and this induces on the man a state merely natural, and thrusts him into a sensual state so that he cannot be elevated into the spiritual state wherein conjugial love must be (see nos. 338, 339). [2] 2. That it is not to be contracted with a virgin or undeflowered woman, is because with women conjugial love makes one with their virginity, and from this, is the chastity, purity, and sanctity of that love. Wherefore, solemnly to promise and surrender her virginity to any man is to give a pledge that she will love him to eternity. For this reason, a virgin can by no rational consent bargain it away save with the solemn promise of a conjugial covenant. It is also the crown of her honor, and therefore, to snatch it away without the covenant of marriage, and afterwards to discard her, is to make a harlot of some virgin who might have become a bride and a chaste wife, or to defraud some man--and both deeds are damnable. He therefore who takes to himself a virgin as a mistress may indeed cohabit with her, and thus initiate her into the friendship of love, but still with the constant intention, if she does not commit whoredom, that she be or may become his wife. [3] 3. That pellicacy is not to be contracted with a married woman, because this is adultery, is evident. [4] 4. That the love of pellicacy is to be kept separate from conjugial love is because they are distinct loves and therefore are not to be commingled; for the love of pellicacy is an unchaste, natural, and external love, but the love of marriage is chaste, spiritual, and internal. The love of pellicacy keeps the souls of the two distinct and conjoins only the sensual things of the body, but the love of marriage unites souls, and also, from the union of souls, so unites the sensual things of the body that from two they become as one, that is, one flesh. [5] 5. The love of pellicacy enters only into the understanding and into all that depends on the understanding; but the love of marriage enters also into the will and into all that depends on the will, thus, into each and every single thing of the man. Wherefore, if the love of pellicacy becomes the love of marriage, the man cannot with any right withdraw from it without a violation of the conjugial union; and if he does withdraw and take another woman, conjugial love perishes in the breach of it. It should be known that the love of pellicacy is kept separate from conjugial love, by the man not promising marriage to his mistress, nor leading her into any hope of marriage. Nevertheless, it is preferable that the torch of love of the sex be first kindled with the wife.
460. (xiv) Pellicacy is preferable to roving lust, provided it is not entered on with more than one woman, or with a virgin or undefiowered woman, or with a married woman, and is held away from marital love. It has been pointed out just above when and with whom pellicacy is preferable to roving lust. 1. Pellicacy is not to be entered on with more than one woman, because with more than one it has something polygamous in it, inducing a merely natural state on a man, and thrusting him so far down into the sensuous that he cannot be raised into the spiritual state in which marital love must be (see n. 338-339). [2] 2. It is not to be entered on with a virgin or undeflowered woman, because marital love in women makes one with their virginity; thence that love has its chastity, purity and holiness. Solemnly to promise and yield her virginity to any man, is therefore to give a token that she will love him to eternity. A virgin cannot with her reason's assent bargain it away, therefore, except with the promise of a marriage covenant. Her virginity is also the crown of her honor. To snatch it away beforehand, then, without a covenant of marriage, and later to discard her, is to make a harlot of a virgin who might have become a bride and chaste wife, or to defraud some man, and either is a wrong. The man therefore who takes a virgin to himself as a mistress, may indeed live with her and so initiate her into the friendship of love, but still with the constant intention, if she commits no whoredom, that she shall be or become his wife. [3] 3. It is obvious that pellicacy is not to be entered into with a married woman, for this is adultery. [4] 4. Love in pellicacy is to be held away from marital love for the reason that the two loves are distinct and therefore not to be mixed. For love in pellicacy is unchaste, natural and external love, while love in marriage is chaste, spiritual and internal. Love in pellicacy leaves the souls of the two distinct and joins only the sensuous life of the body, but love in marriage unites the souls and from that union the sensuous bodily life, until from two they become like one, which is one flesh. [5] 5. Love in pellicacy enters the understanding only and what depends on the understanding; but love in marriage enters the will also and what depends on the will, thus each and all things in man. If the love in pellicacy becomes marriage love, therefore, the man cannot rightfully withdraw without violating the marital union, and if he does withdraw and marry another, marital love perishes in the breach. It should be known that love in pellicacy is held away from marital love by not promising marriage to the mistress nor leading her into any hope of marriage. Nevertheless it is preferable that the torch of love of the sex be kindled first with one's wife.
460. (14) That pellicacy is to be preferred to wandering lust, if only it be not entered into with mare than one; and no' with a virgin or undeflowered woman; nor with a married woman; and if it be kept apart from conjugial love. When, and with whom pellicacy is preferable to wandering lust has been pointed out just above.
(1) The reason why pellicacy should not be entered into with more than one is that with more there is something polygamous in it, which brings man into a state merely natural, and thrusts him down into the sensual so far that he cannot be elevated into the spiritual state in which conjugial love must be (see n. 338, 339).
(2) That it must not be engaged in with a virgin or undeflowered woman, is because with women conjugial love makes one with their virginity. Hence the chastity, the purity, and the sanctity of that love. Wherefore, to pledge and give up her virginity to any man, is to give a token that she will love him to eternity. For that reason a virgin can by no rational consent bargain it away, unless with the promise of the conjugial covenant. It is also the crown of her honor. To snatch it therefore, beforehand without the covenant of marriage, and afterwards to discard her, is to make a harlot of some virgin who might have become a bride, and a chaste wife, or to defraud some man, and either is damnable. He therefore, who does take to himself a virgin as a mistress, may indeed cohabit with her, and thus initiate her into the friendship of love, but still with the constant intention, if she does not commit whoredom, that she shall be or shall become his wife.
(3) It is plain that pellicacy must not be engaged in with a married woman, because that is adultery. (4) The reason why the love of pellicacy must be kept apart from conjugial love is, that the loves are distinct, and must not therefore, be mixed together. For the love of pellicacy is an unchaste, natural, and external love, while conjugial love is chaste, spiritual, and internal; the love of pellicacy keeps the souls of the two apart, and conjoins only the sensuals of the body; while conjugial love unites the souls, and from the union of souls unites the sensuals of the body also, even so that the two become as it were one, that is one flesh.
(5) The love of pellicacy only enters the understanding, and into those things which depend upon the understanding; but the love of marriage enters also into the will, and into those things that depend on the will, and thus into all things and everything of the man. If then the love of pellicacy becomes the love of marriage, the man cannot by any right withdraw without a violation of conjugial union; and if he does withdraw and take another, conjugial love perishes in the breach of it. It must be known that the love of pellicacy is held apart from conjugial love, if the man does not promise marriage to the mistress, nor lead her into any hope of marriage.
But it is better that the torch of the love of the sex be first lighted with a wife.
460. XIV. Quod pellicatus libidini vagae praestet, modo non pangatur cum pluribus, nec cum virgine seu illibata, neque cum maritata, ac teneatur separatus ab amore conjugiali. Quando et apud quos pellicatus libidini vagae praestat, mox supra indigitatum est.
I. Quod Pellicatus non pangendus sit cum pluribus, quam cum una, est quia cum pluribus polygamicum inest, quod inducit homini statum mere naturalem, ac detrudit hunc in sensualem, usque ut non possit in statum spiritualem, in quo erit amor conjugialis, elevari, videatur338, 339
[2] II. Quod non pangendus sit cum Virgine seu illibata, est quia amor conjugialis apud foeminas unum agit cum illarum virginitate; inde est amoris istius castitas, puritas et sanctitas; quare illam alicui viro spondere et addicere, est dare tesseram quod illum in aeternum amatura sit; idcirco virgo illam ex nullo consensu rationali potest pacisci, nisi cum sponsione foederis conjugialis; est quoque illa honoris ejus corona; quare absque foedere conjugii praeripere illam, et postea dimittere, est aliquam virginem, quae potest sponsa et casta uxor fieri, meretricem facere, aut aliquem virum defraudare, ac utrumque damnosum est: idcirco qui virginem in pellicem sibi adjungit, potest quidem cohabitare cum illa, et sic illam in amicitiam amoris initiare, sed usque cum constanti intentione, si non moechatur, ut sit vel fiat sua uxor.
[3] III. Quod pellicatus non pangendus sit cum maritata, quia hoc est adulterium, patet.
[4] IV. Quod amor pellicatus tenendus sit separatus ab amore conjugiali, causa est, quia amores illi distincti sunt, et ideo non commiscendi; amor enim pellicatus est amor incastus, naturalis, et externus, at amor conjugii 1est castus, spiritualis, et internus: amor pellicatus distinguit animas duorum, ac conjungit modo sensualia corporis; at amor conjugii unit animas, et ex unione animarum etiam sensualia corporis, usque dum ex duobus fiunt sicut unum, quod est una caro.
[5] V. Amor pellicatus modo intrat in intellectum, et in illa quae ab intellectu pendent; at amor conjugii intrat etiam in voluntatem, et in illa quae a voluntate pendent, proinde in omnia et singula hominis; quare si amor pellicatus fit amor conjugii, non potest vir ex aliquo jure, absque violatione unionis conjugialis, recedere; et si recedit, et aliam ducit, amor conjugialis in 2fractura ejus perit: sciendum est, quod amor pellicatus detineatur separatus ab amore conjugiali, per quod pellici non spondeat conjugium, nec illam in aliquam spem conjugii inducat. Praestat tamen, ut taeda amoris sexus cum uxore primum accendatur.
Footnotes:
1. Prima editio: conjugii,
2. Prima editio: en