# On the Veiling of Virgins - Author: [Tertullian](https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/authors/tertullian/) - Latin title: *De virginibus velandis* - Date: ca. 208–213 (approximate) - Source: Franz Oehler, ed., Quinti Septimii Florentis Tertulliani quae supersunt omnia, vol. 1 (Leipzig: T. O. Weigel, 1853), 883–910 (Latin text: Franz Oehler (Oehler 1, 1853), digitized by the Perseus Digital Library (canonical-latinLit), CC BY-SA 4.0) - Translation: Claude, from the original text, unless a passage says otherwise; each passage below gives the translator - Editions and translations: Tertulliani Opera, Pars 2: Opera montanistica, CCSL 2 (Turnhout: Brepols, 1954) - Work page: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/ - Passages: 17 ## On the Veiling of Virgins 1 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/1/#p-1 - Source: Oehler 1:883–885 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Tertullian argues that virgins should be veiled from puberty because truth, not custom, must rule; the rule of faith never changes, but discipline is being brought to maturity by the Paraclete. ### Latin text Proprium iam negotium passus meae opinionis Latine quoque ostendam virgines nostras velari oportere ex quo transitum aetatis suae fecerint: hoc exigere veritatem, cui nemo praescribere potest, non spatium temporum, non patrocinia personarum, non privilegium regionum. Ex his enim fere consuetudo initium ab aliqua ignorantia vel simplicitate sortita in usum per successionem corroboratur et ita adversus veritatem vindicatur. Sed dominus noster Christus veritatem se, non consuetudinem, cognominavit. Si semper Christus, et prior omnibus, aeque veritas sempiterna et antiqua res. Viderint ergo quibus novum est quod sibi vetus est. Haereses non tam novitas quam veritas revincit. Quodcumque adversus veritatem sapit, hoc erit haeresis, etiam vetus consuetudo. Ceterum suo vitio quis quid ignorat. Quod autem ignoratur fuit tam requirendum quam recipiendum quod agnoscitur. Regula quidem fidei una omnino est, sola immobilis et irreformabilis, credendi scilicet in unicum deum omnipotentem, mundi conditorem, et filium eius Iesum Christum, natum ex virgine Maria, crucifixum sub Pontio Pilato, tertia die resuscitatum a mortuis, receptum in caelis, sedentem nunc ad dexteram patris, venturum iudicare vivos et mortuos per carnis etiam resurrectionem. Hac lege fidei manente cetera iam disciplinae et conversationis admittunt novitatem correctionis, operante scilicet et proficiente usque in finem gratia dei. Quale est enim, ut diabolo semper operante et adiciente cottidie ad iniquitatis ingenia opus dei aut cessaverit aut proficere destiterit? cum propterea paracletum miserit dominus, ut, quoniam humana mediocritas omnia semel capere non poterat, paulatim dirigeretur et ordinaretur et ad perfectum perduceretur disciplina ab illo vicario domini, spiritu sancto. Adhuc, inquit, multa habeo loqui vobis, sed nondum potestis ea baiulare: cum venerit ille spiritus veritatis, deducet vos in omnem veritatem et supervenientia renuntiabit vobis. Sed et supra de hoc eius opere pronuntiavit. Quae est ergo paracleti administratio, nisi haec, quod disciplina dirigitur, quod scripturae revelantur, quod intellectus reformatur, quod ad meliora proficitur? Nihil sine aetate est, omnia tempus expectant. Denique Ecclesiastes, Tempus, inquit, omni rei. Aspice ipsam creaturam paulatim ad fructum promoveri. Granum est primo, et de grano frutex oritur, et de frutice arbuscula enititur. deinde rami et frondes invalescunt et totum arboris nomen expanditur, inde germinis tumor et flos de germine solvitur, et de flore fructus aperitur: is quoque rudis aliquamdiu et informis paulatim aetatem suam dirigens eruditur in mansuetudinem saporis. Sic et iustitia (nam idem deus iustitiae et creaturae) primo fuit in rudimentis, natura deum metuens: dehinc per legem et prophetas promovit in infantiam, dehinc per evangelium efferbuit in iuventutem, nunc per paracletum componitur in maturitatem. Hic erit solus a Christo magister et dicendus et verendus. Non enim ab se loquitur, sed quae mandantur a Christo. Hic solus antecessor, quia solus post Christum. Hunc qui receperunt, veritatem consuetudini anteponunt. Hunc qui audierunt usque, non olim, prophetantem, virgines contegunt. ### English translation (Claude) Having already been obliged to treat this matter as my own view requires, I will show in Latin too that our virgins ought to be veiled from the time they have crossed the threshold of their age: that this is demanded by truth, against which no one can plead prescription, neither length of time, nor the patronage of persons, nor the privilege of regions. For from these, as a rule, custom, having taken its start from some ignorance or simplicity, is strengthened into usage by succession, and so is defended against truth. But our Lord Christ called himself truth, not custom. If Christ is always, and before all things, then truth is equally an everlasting and ancient thing. Let those see to it, then, for whom that is new which is old in itself. It is not so much novelty as truth that refutes heresies. Whatever savours of opposition to truth will be heresy, even an old custom. For the rest, if anyone is ignorant of something, it is by his own fault. And what is not known ought to have been sought out, just as what is recognized ought to be accepted. The rule of faith, indeed, is altogether one, alone immovable and unreformable: that is, of believing in one God almighty, the maker of the world, and in his Son Jesus Christ, born of the Virgin Mary, crucified under Pontius Pilate, raised from the dead on the third day, received in the heavens, now sitting at the right hand of the Father, who will come to judge the living and the dead, through the resurrection of the flesh as well. While this law of faith remains, the other matters, of discipline and conduct, admit the novelty of correction, the grace of God, of course, working and advancing to the end. For what sort of thing would it be that, while the devil is always working and adding daily to the devices of iniquity, the work of God should either have ceased or stopped advancing? Indeed the Lord sent the Paraclete for this very reason, that, since human mediocrity could not take in everything at once, discipline might gradually be directed and ordered and brought to perfection by that vicar of the Lord, the Holy Spirit. “I still have many things to say to you,” he says, “but you cannot yet bear them; when that Spirit of truth comes, he will lead you into all truth and will announce to you the things to come.” And earlier too he declared this work of his. What, then, is the ministry of the Paraclete but this: that discipline is directed, that the Scriptures are revealed, that understanding is reformed, that there is progress toward better things? Nothing is without its age; all things await their time. In short, Ecclesiastes says, “A time for everything.” Look at creation itself, gradually brought forward to fruit. First there is a seed, and from the seed a shoot arises, and from the shoot a sapling struggles up; then branches and leaves gain strength, and the whole name of tree spreads out; then comes the swelling of the bud, and from the bud the flower is loosed, and from the flower the fruit is disclosed; and the fruit too, for some time rough and shapeless, gradually guiding its age, is trained to mellowness of flavour. So too righteousness (for the God of righteousness and of creation is the same) was first in its rudiments, fearing God by nature; then through the law and the prophets it advanced to infancy; then through the gospel it grew fervent in youth; now through the Paraclete it is being settled into maturity. He will be the only teacher after Christ, both to be called so and to be revered. For he does not speak from himself, but what is commanded by Christ. He alone is the leader, because he alone comes after Christ. Those who have received him set truth before custom. Those who have heard him prophesying, up to now and not only long ago, veil their virgins. ### Scripture references - John 14:6: allusion, high confidence - John 16:12: quotation, high confidence - John 14:26: allusion, medium confidence - Eccl 3:1: quotation, high confidence - Mark 4:28: allusion, medium confidence - John 16:13: allusion, high confidence ### Translation notes - This is a work of Tertullian's New Prophecy (Montanist) period: he presents the Paraclete's recent prophecy as bringing church discipline to maturity, a view his Catholic contemporaries did not accept; it is translated as written. The opening phrase probably refers to an earlier Greek treatise on the subject (now lost); the sense is uncertain. The quotations and allusions are John 14:6, John 16:12–13, John 14:26, Eccl 3:1, and Mark 4:28. ### Citation (SBL) Tertullian, Virg. 1 (Oehler 1:883–885; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/1/#p-1). ## On the Veiling of Virgins 2 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/1/#p-2 - Source: Oehler 1:885–886 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Many apostolic churches in Greece and elsewhere veil their virgins; since they are one church with us, their custom is ours too, and the custom that hides virgins from view better suits God's discipline. ### Latin text Sed nolo interim hunc morem veritati deputare. Consuetudo sit tantisper, ut consuetudini etiam consuetudinem opponam. Per Graeciam et quasdam barbarias eius plures ecclesiae virgines suas abscondunt. Est et sub hoc caelo institutum istud alicubi, ne qui gentilitati Graecanicae aut barbaricae consuetudinem illam adscribat. Sed eas ego ecclesias proposui quas et ipsi apostoli vel apostolici viri condiderunt, et puto ante quosdam. Habent igitur et illas eandem consuetudinis auctoritatem, tempora et antecessores opponunt magis quam posterae istae. Quid observabimus, quid deligemus? Non possumus respuere consuetudinem, quam damnare non possumus, utpote non extraneam, quia non extraneorum, cum quibus scilicet communicamus ius pacis et nomen fraternitatis. Una nobis et illis fides, unus deus, idem Christus, eadem spes, eadem lavacri sacramenta, semel dixerim, una ecclesia sumus. Ita nostrum est quodcunque nostrorum est. Ceterum dividis corpus. Tamen hic, sicut in omnibus varie institutis et dubiis et incertis fieri solet, adhibenda fuit examinatio, quae magis ex duabus tam diversis consuetudinibus disciplinae dei conveniret. Et utique ea deligenda quae virgines includit, soli deo notas, quibus, praeter quod a deo non ab hominibus captanda gloria est, etiam ipsum bonum suum erubescendum est. Virginem magis laudando quam vituperando confundas; quia delicti durior frons est, ab ipso et in ipso delicto impudentiam docta. Nam illam consuetudinem, quae virgines negat dum ostendit, nemo probasset, nisi aliqui tales quales virgines ipsae. Tales enim oculi volent virginem visam, quales habet virgo quae videri volet. Invicem se eadem oculorum genera desiderant. Eiusdem libidinis est videri et videre. Tam sancti viri est subfundi, si virginem viderit, quam sanctae virginis, si a viro visa sit. ### English translation (Claude) But for the moment I do not want to credit this practice to truth. Let it be custom for the time being, so that I may oppose custom to custom. Throughout Greece and certain of its barbarian regions, many churches keep their virgins covered. This practice exists under our sky too, in some places, lest anyone ascribe that custom to Greek or barbarian heathen ways. But I have put forward those churches which the apostles themselves or apostolic men founded, before certain others, I think. Those churches, then, have the same authority of custom; they set against us times and predecessors more than these later churches do. What shall we observe? What shall we choose? We cannot reject a custom which we cannot condemn, since it is not foreign, because it belongs not to foreigners, but to those with whom we share the right of peace and the name of brotherhood. We and they have one faith, one God, the same Christ, the same hope, the same sacraments of the bath; to say it once and for all, we are one church. So whatever belongs to our people is ours. Otherwise you divide the body. Yet here, as usually happens in all matters variously established, doubtful, and uncertain, an examination should have been made as to which of two such different customs better suits the discipline of God. And surely the one should be chosen that shuts virgins in, known to God alone, who, besides the fact that glory is to be sought from God and not from men, ought to blush even at their own good. You embarrass a virgin more by praising than by blaming her, since sin has the harder forehead, taught shamelessness by sin itself and in sin itself. For that custom which denies virgins while it displays them no one would have approved except some people who are like such virgins themselves. For the eyes that will want a virgin to be seen will be like the eyes of the virgin who will want to be seen. The same kinds of eyes desire one another. To be seen and to see belong to the same lust. It is as much the mark of a holy man to blush if he has seen a virgin as of a holy virgin to blush if she has been seen by a man. ### Scripture references - Eph 4:4: allusion, high confidence - John 5:44: allusion, medium confidence - 1 Cor 12:12: echo, low confidence ### Translation notes - The allusions are Eph 4:4–6, John 5:44, and 1 Cor 12:12–27 (“you divide the body”). ### Citation (SBL) Tertullian, Virg. 2 (Oehler 1:885–886; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/1/#p-2). ## On the Veiling of Virgins 3 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/1/#p-3 - Source: Oehler 1:886–887 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Veiling had been left to choice in Carthage until unveiled virgins, claiming to be scandalized, demanded that veiled virgins be uncovered; Tertullian condemns stripping a consecrated virgin of her veil as a kind of violation. ### Latin text Sed nec inter consuetudines dispicere voluerunt illi sanctissimi antecessores. Tamen tolerabilius apud nos ad usque proxime utrique consuetudini communicabatur. Arbitrio permissa res erat, ut quaeque voluisset aut tegi aut prostitui, sicut et nubere, quod et ipsum neque cogitur neque prohibetur. Contenta erat veritas pacisci cum consuetudine, ut tacite sub consuetudinis nomine frueretur se vel ex parte. Sed quoniam coeperat agnitio proficere, ut per licentiam utriusque moris indicium melioris partis emergeret, statim ille adversarius bonorum multoque institutorum opus suum fecit. Ambiunt virgines hominum adversus virgines dei nuda plane fronte temerariam in audaciam excitatae, et virgines videntur quae aliquid a viris petere possunt, nedum tale factum, ut scilicet aemulae earum, tanto magis liberae quanto Christi solius ancillae, dedantur illis. Scandalizamur, inquiunt, quia aliter aliae incedunt, et malunt scandalizari quam provocari, Scandalum, nisi fallor, non bonae rei, sed malae exemplum est, aedificans ad delictum. Bonae res neminem scandalizant, nisi malam mentem. Si bonum est modestia, verecundia, fastidium gloriae, soli deo captans placere, agnoscant malum suum quae de tali bono scandalizantur. Quid enim, si et incontinentes dicant se a continentibus scandalizari, continentia revocanda est? Et ne multinubi scandalizentur, monogamia recusanda est? Cur non magis hae quaerantur scandalo sibi esse petulantiam, impudentiam ostentaticiae virginitatis? Propter eiusmodi igitur capita nundinaticia trahantur virgines sanctae in ecclesiam, erubescentes quod cognoscantur in medio, paventes quod detegantur accersitae quasi ad stuprum. Non minus enim et hoc pati nolunt. Omnis publicatio virginis bonae stupri passio est, et tamen vim carnis pati minus est, quia de officio naturae venit. Sed cum spiritus ipse violatur in virgine sublato velamine, didicit amittere quod tuebatur. O sacrilegae manus, quae dicatum deo habitum detrahere potuerunt! Quid peius aliquis persecutor fecisset, si hoc a virgine electum cognovisset? Denudasti puellam a capite, et tota iam virgo sibi non est, alia est facta. Exsurge igitur veritas, exsurge et quasi de patientia erumpe! Nullam volo consuetudinem defendas; nam iam et illa, sub qua te fruebaris, expugnatur. Te esse demonstra quae virgines tegit. Ipsa scripturas tuas interpretare, quas consuetudo non novit. Si enim nosset, nunquam esset. ### English translation (Claude) But those most holy predecessors did not want to choose between the customs either. Among us, at any rate, until recently both customs were followed with some tolerance. The matter was left to choice, so that each girl, as she wished, could be either covered or exposed, just as with marrying, which itself is neither compelled nor forbidden. Truth was content to make a pact with custom, so as to enjoy itself silently under the name of custom, even in part. But since recognition had begun to advance, so that through the freedom allowed to both practices the evidence for the better side was emerging, at once that adversary of good things, and much more of good institutions, did his work. Virgins of men canvass against virgins of God, roused, with a plainly bare forehead, to rash boldness; and they are thought to be virgins who can ask anything of men, let alone such a thing as this: that their rivals, the more free as they are handmaids of Christ alone, should be surrendered to them. “We are scandalized,” they say, “because others go about differently”; and they prefer to be scandalized rather than to be spurred on. A scandal, unless I am mistaken, is the example not of a good thing but of a bad one, building up to sin. Good things scandalize no one except an evil mind. If modesty, bashfulness, disdain of glory, and seeking to please God alone are good, let those who are scandalized by such good recognize their own evil. For what if the incontinent say they are scandalized by the continent: must continence be called back? And lest the many-times married be scandalized, must monogamy be refused? Why should these not rather complain that the petulance and impudence of a showy virginity are a scandal to them? For the sake of heads like these, fit for the market, are holy virgins to be dragged into the church, blushing at being recognized in public, trembling at being uncovered, summoned as though to be violated? For they do not want to suffer this any less. Every public exposure of a good virgin is to her the suffering of violation; and yet to suffer violence of the flesh is less, because it comes from the function of nature. But when the spirit itself is violated in a virgin by the removal of her veil, she has learned to lose what she was guarding. O sacrilegious hands, which could drag off a garment dedicated to God! What worse would some persecutor have done, had he known that the virgin had chosen this? You have stripped the girl of her head, and she is no longer wholly a virgin to herself; she has become another. Rise up, then, Truth; rise up and break out, as it were, from your patience! I want you to defend no custom; for even the custom under which you were enjoying yourself is now being attacked. Show that it is you who veil virgins. Interpret your Scriptures yourself, which custom does not know; for if it knew them, it would never have existed. ### Scripture references - 1 Cor 7:36: echo, low confidence ### Translation notes - “Monogamy” here means marrying only once, as in Tertullian's On Monogamy. “Violated” and “violation” render stuprum. The words bonorum multoque institutorum are compressed in the Latin. ### Citation (SBL) Tertullian, Virg. 3 (Oehler 1:886–887; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/1/#p-3). ## On the Veiling of Virgins 4 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/1/#p-4 - Source: Oehler 1:887–889 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Paul's rule that “women” be veiled includes virgins: he distinguishes virgins from married women only where the subject requires it, and “woman” is the general term that covers every female, as “body” covers every limb. ### Latin text Quatenus autem et de scripturis adversus veritatem argumentari consuetudo est, statim opponitur nobis nullam mentionem virginum ab apostolo factam ubi de velamine praefinit, sed tantum mulieres nominatas, cum, si voluisset et virgines tegi, de virginibus quoque cum mulieribus nominatis pronuntiasset: quomodo illic, inquit, ubi de nuptiis tractat, quid observandum sit etiam de virginibus declarat. Itaque non contineri eas lege velandi capitis, ut non nominatas in hac lege, immo ex hoc revelari, qua non iubentur quae nec nominantur. Sed et nos eandem argumentationem retorquemus. Qui enim sciebat alias utriusque generis facere mentionem, virginis dico et mulieris, id est non virginis, ex ca(??) distinctionis, in his, in quibus non nominat virginem, non faciens distinctionem ostendit condicionis communionem. Ceterum potuit hic quoque constituere differentiam inter virginem et mulierem, sicut alibi dicit, Divisa est mulier et virgo. Igitur quas non divisit tacendo, in(??)teravit. Nec tamen quia illic divisa est et mulier et virgo, hic quoque patrocinabitur illa divisio, ut quidam vo(??)t. Quanta enim alibi dicta non valent, ubi dicta scilicet non sunt, nisi si eadem sit causa quae alibi, ut sufficiat semel dictum? Illa autem causa virginis et mulieris longe divisa est ab hac specie. Divisa est, inquit, mulier et virgo. Quare? quoniam innupta, id est virgo, cogitat ea quae sunt domini, ut sit sancta et corpore et spiritu, nupta autem, id est non virgo, cogitat quomodo placeat viro. Haec erit interpretatio divisionis illius, nullum habens locum in isto capitulo, in quo neque de nuptiis neque de animo et cogitatu mulieris et virginis pronuntiatum, sed de capite velando. Cuius nullam volens esse disceptationem spiritus sanctus uno nomine mulieris etiam virginem intellegi voluit, quam proprie (??) nominando a muliere non separavit, et non separando coniunxit ei a qua non separavit. Novum est nunc ergo principali vocabulo uti et cetera nihilominus in eo vocabulo intellegi, ubi nulla est necessitas singillatim distinguendae universitatis? Naturaliter compendium sermonis et gratum et necessarium est, quoniam sermo laciniosus et onerosus et vanus est. Sic et generalibus vocabulis contenti sumus, comprehendentibus in se specialium intellectum. Ergo iam de vocabulo ipso. Naturale vocabulum est femina. Naturalis vocabuli generale mulier. Generalis etiam speciale virgo vel nupta vel vidua vel quot etiam aetatis nomina accedunt. Subiectum igitur est generali speciale, quia generale prius est, et subcessivum antecessivo et portionale universali; in ipso intellegitur cui subicitur, et in ipso significatur, quia in ipso continetur. Sic nec manus nec pes nec ullum membrorum desiderat significari corpore nominato. Et si mundum dixeris, illic erit et caelum et quae in eo, sol et luna et sidera et astra et terra et freta et omnis census elementorum. Omnia dixeris, cum id dixeris quod ex omnibus constat. Sic et mulierem nominando quicquid est mulieris nominavit. ### English translation (Claude) But since custom also argues from the Scriptures against truth, it is at once objected to us that the apostle made no mention of virgins when he laid down rules about the veil, but named only women; whereas, if he had wanted virgins too to be covered, he would have declared about virgins as well, naming them together with women, just as there, they say, where he treats of marriage, he also declares what is to be observed concerning virgins. So, they say, virgins are not included in the law of veiling the head, as they are not named in this law; indeed, by this very fact they are to be unveiled, since those are not commanded who are not named. But we turn the same argument back. For he who knew elsewhere how to mention both kinds, I mean the virgin and the woman (that is, the non-virgin), for the sake of distinction, shows, in those places where he does not name the virgin and makes no distinction, that their condition is shared. Moreover, he could have established a difference here too between virgin and woman, as he says elsewhere, “The woman and the virgin are divided.” Therefore those whom he did not divide, by keeping silent, he joined together. Nor, because there the woman and the virgin are divided, will that division also plead for them here, as some would have it. For how many things said elsewhere have no force where they have not been said, unless the case is the same as elsewhere, so that it suffices to have said it once! But that case of the virgin and the woman is far removed from this topic. “The woman and the virgin are divided,” he says. Why? Because the unmarried woman, that is, the virgin, thinks of the things of the Lord, that she may be holy in body and in spirit; but the married woman, that is, the non-virgin, thinks how she may please her husband. This will be the interpretation of that division, which has no place in this chapter, in which nothing is declared about marriage or about the mind and thought of the woman and the virgin, but about veiling the head. The Holy Spirit, wishing there to be no dispute about it, meant the virgin too to be understood under the one name of woman; by not naming her specifically he did not separate her from the woman, and by not separating her he joined her to the one from whom he did not separate her. Is it something new, then, to use a principal term and still to understand the others in that term, where there is no need to distinguish the whole one by one? Naturally, brevity of speech is both pleasing and necessary, since long-winded speech is burdensome and empty. So too we are content with general terms, which contain within themselves the understanding of the particular ones. Now, then, about the term itself. The natural term is “female” (femina). Under the natural term, the general one is “woman” (mulier). Under the general, again, the special: virgin or married woman or widow, or however many names of age are added. The special, then, is subject to the general, because the general comes first, as the subsequent is subject to the antecedent and the part to the whole; it is understood in the very term to which it is subject, and signified in it, because it is contained in it. So neither hand nor foot nor any of the members needs to be named when the body is named. And if you say “the world”, there will be the sky and what is in it, sun and moon and stars and constellations, and the earth and the seas and the whole list of the elements. You will have said everything when you have said what consists of everything. So too, by naming “woman”, he named whatever is woman. ### Scripture references - 1 Cor 11:5: allusion, high confidence - 1 Cor 7:25: allusion, high confidence - 1 Cor 7:34: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Latin mulier means both “woman” and “wife”; Tertullian's opponents took it in the second sense. Several words in this chapter are marked uncertain in the digital text; the sense is clear. The references are 1 Cor 11:5–6 and 1 Cor 7:25, 34. ### Citation (SBL) Tertullian, Virg. 4 (Oehler 1:887–889; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/1/#p-4). ## On the Veiling of Virgins 5 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/1/#p-5 - Source: Oehler 1:889–891 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Eve was called “woman” while still a virgin in paradise, so the word denotes the female sex, not the married state; only the name “Eve”, mother of the living, looked forward to marriage. ### Latin text Sed quoniam ita mulieris nomen usurpant, ut non putent competere illud nisi ei soli quae virum passa sit, probari a nobis oportet proprietatem eius vocabuli ad sexum ipsum, non ad gradum sexus pertinere, quo communiter etiam virgines censeantur. Cum hoc genus secundi hominis a deo factum est in adiutorium hominis, femina illa, statim mulier est cognominata, adhuc felix, adhuc digna paradiso, adhuc virgo. Vocabitur, inquit, mulier. Habes itaque nomen, non dico iam virgini commune, sed proprium, quod a principio virgo sortita est. Sed ingeniose quidam de futuro volunt dictum, Vocabitur mulier, quasi quae hoc futura esset, cum virginitatem resignasset, quoniam et adiecit, Propterea relinquet homo patrem et matrem, et conglutinabitur mulieri suae, et erunt duo in una carne. Ostendant igitur primo, ubi sit subtilitas ista, si de futuro mulier cognominata est, quod interea vocabulum acceperit. Non potest enim sine vocabulo praesentis qualitatis suae fuisse. Ceterum quale est, ut quae in futurum vocaretur nomine designato, in praesenti nihil cognominaretur? Omnibus animalibus Adam nomina imposuit et nemini ex futura condicione, sed ex praesenti institutione, cui condicio quaecunque serviret, hoc appellata quod a primordio voluit. Quid ergo tunc vocabatur? Atquin quotienscumque in scriptura nominatur, mulier appellatur, antequam nupta, et nunquam virgo, cum virgo. Hoc nomen tum unum illi fuit, et quando nihil prophetico modo dictum est. Nam cum scriptura refert fuisse nudos duos, Adam et mulierem eius, nec hoc de futuro sapit, quasi mulierem dixerit eius in praesagio uxoris, sed quoniam et innupta illius mulier, ut de substantia ipsius. Hoc, inquit, os ex ossibus meis et caro ex carne mea vocabitur mulier. Hinc ergo tacita conscientia naturae ipsa divinitas animae in usum sermonis eduxit nescientibus hominibus, sicut et alia multa, quae ex scriptura fieri et dici solere alibi poterimus ostendere, uti mulieres nostras dicamus uxores, quamquam et improprie quaedam loquamur. Nam et Graeci, qui magis vocabulo mulieris in uxore utuntur, alia habent propria vocabula uxoris. Sed malo hunc usum ad scripturae testimonium deputare. Ubi enim duo in unam carnem efficiuntur per matrimonii nexum, caro ex carne et os ex ossibus vocatur secundum originem mulier eius ex cuius substantia incipit censeri facta uxor. Ita mulier non natura nomen est uxoris, sed uxor condicione nomen est mulieris. Denique mulier et non uxor dici potest, non mulier autem uxor dici non potest, quia nec esse. Constituto igitur nomine novae feminae, quod est mulier, et explicito quod prius fuit, id est nomine assignato, convertit iam ad propheticam rationem, uti diceret, Propter hanc relinquet homo patrem et matrem. Adeo separatum est nomen a prophetia, quantum et ab ipsa persona, ut non utique de ipsa Eva dixerit, sed in illas feminas futuras, quas in matrice generis feminini nominarit. Alioquin non Adam relicturus erat patrem et matrem, quos non habebat, propter Evam. Ergo non ad Evam pertinet, quia nec ad Adam, quod prophetice dictum est. De maritorum enim condicione praedictum, qui ob mulierem parentes suos erant relicturi, quod in Evam cadere non potuit, quia nec in Adam. Si ita res est, apparet non propter futurum mulierem cognominatam, ad quam futurum non pertinebat. Eo accedit, quod ipse rationem eius nominis edidit. Cum enim dixisset, Vocabitur mulier, Quoniam ex viro suo sumpta est, ait, et ipso adhuc virgine. Sed dicemus et de viri nomine suo loco. Nemo itaque nomen ad prophetiam interpretetur, quod ex alia significatione deductum est, praesertim cum appareat, ubi de futuro nomen acceperit, illic scilicet, ubi Eva cognominatur, personali iam vocabulo, quia naturale praecesserat. Si enim Eva mater viventium est, ecce ex futuro cognominatur, ecce uxor et non virgo praenuntiatur. Hoc erit vocabulum nupturae; ex nupta enim mater. Ita hic quoque ostenditur non de futuro mulierem tunc nominatam, quae postmodum acceptura erat futurae condicionis suae nomen. Responsum satis est ad hanc partem. ### English translation (Claude) But since they appropriate the name of woman in such a way as to think it applies only to her who has known a man, we must prove that the proper sense of the word belongs to the sex itself, not to a stage of the sex, so that virgins too are reckoned under it in common. When this kind, the second human being, was made by God as a help for man, that female was at once named woman, while she was still happy, still worthy of paradise, still a virgin. “She shall be called woman,” it says. You have, then, a name not merely common to the virgin but proper to her, which from the beginning a virgin received. But some ingeniously claim that “She shall be called woman” was said with a view to the future, as though she would be this when she had given up her virginity, since he also added, “For this reason a man will leave father and mother and cleave to his woman, and the two will be in one flesh.” Let them show first, then, where this subtlety leaves them: if she was named woman with a view to the future, what name did she receive in the meantime? For she cannot have been without a name for her present quality. And what sort of thing is it that she who was to be called by a designated name in the future should be called nothing in the present? Adam gave names to all the animals, and to none from its future condition, but from its present constitution, whatever condition it might later serve; each was called what it was meant to be from the beginning. What, then, was she called at that time? And indeed, whenever she is named in Scripture, she is called woman before she was married, and never virgin while she was a virgin. This was then her only name, and at a time when nothing was said prophetically. For when Scripture reports that the two were naked, Adam and his woman, this too does not smack of the future, as if it had said “his woman” in anticipation of a wife, but because, even unmarried, she was his woman, as being of his own substance. “This,” he says, “is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman.” From this, then, the very divinity of the soul, by the silent awareness of nature, brought into the usage of speech, without men knowing it, as it has many other things which we can show elsewhere are commonly done and said on the basis of Scripture, that we call our wives our “women”, although we speak somewhat improperly. For the Greeks too, who use the word for woman more often of a wife, have other words proper to a wife. But I prefer to credit this usage to the testimony of Scripture. For where two are made one flesh through the bond of marriage, she who is flesh of flesh and bone of bones is called, according to her origin, the woman of him from whose substance she, now made a wife, begins to be reckoned. So “woman” is not by nature the name of a wife, but “wife” is by condition a name of a woman. In short, one can be called a woman and not a wife, but one who is not a woman cannot be called a wife, because she cannot be one. Having established, then, the name of the new female, which is “woman”, and explained what she was before, that is, having assigned the name, he now turns to the prophetic account, saying, “For her sake a man will leave father and mother.” So far is the name separated from the prophecy, as far as from the person herself, that he did not say this of Eve herself, but of those future females whom he had named in the mother of the female race. Otherwise it was not Adam who was to leave father and mother, whom he did not have, for Eve's sake. So what was said prophetically does not concern Eve, since it does not concern Adam. For it was foretold of the condition of husbands, who were to leave their parents for a woman, which could not apply to Eve, because it did not apply to Adam. If this is so, it is clear that she was not named woman on account of the future, to which the future did not pertain. Add that he himself gave the reason for the name. For when he had said, “She shall be called woman,” he says, “because she was taken from her man,” and he was still a virgin himself. But we shall speak about the name of man in its place. So let no one interpret as prophetic a name which is derived from another meaning, especially since it is clear where she received a name with reference to the future: namely, where she is called Eve, now a personal name, because the natural one had come first. For if Eve is the mother of the living, see, she is named from the future; see, a wife and not a virgin is foretold. This will be the name of one who is to marry; for it is by being married that one becomes a mother. So here too it is shown that she was not then named woman with reference to the future, since she was later to receive the name of her future condition. That is answer enough on this point. ### Scripture references - Gen 2:18: allusion, high confidence - Gen 2:23: quotation, high confidence - Gen 2:24: quotation, high confidence - Gen 2:19: allusion, high confidence - Gen 2:25: allusion, high confidence - Gen 3:20: allusion, high confidence ### Translation notes - The Latin mulier (“woman”) and uxor (“wife”) are kept distinct in the translation. The quotations and allusions are Gen 2:18, 2:23, 2:24, 2:19–20, 2:25, and 3:20. ### Citation (SBL) Tertullian, Virg. 5 (Oehler 1:889–891; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/1/#p-5). ## On the Veiling of Virgins 6 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/1/#p-6 - Source: Oehler 1:891–892 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Paul calls the Virgin Mary a “woman” and the angel blesses her “among women”, so the word includes virgins; she was so called not because she was betrothed but because she was female. ### Latin text Videamus nunc, si et apostolus formam vocabuli istius secundum Genesim observat, sexui deputans illud, sic mulierem vocans virginem Mariam quemadmodum et Genesis Evam. Scribens enim ad Galatas, Misit, inquit, deus filium suum factum ex muliere, quam utique virginem constat fuisse, licet Hebion resistat. Agnosco et angelum Gabrielem ad virginem missum. Sed cum benedicit illam, inter mulieres, non inter virgines deputat: Benedicta tu inter mulieres. Sciebat et angelus mulierem etiam virginem dici. Sed et ad haec duo ingeniose quidam respondisse sibi visus est, quoniam quidem desponsata est Maria, idcirco et ab angelo et ab apostolo mulierem pronuntiatam. Desponsata enim quodammodo nupta. Tamen inter quodammodo et verum satis interest, duntaxat hoc in loco. Nam alibi ita sane habendum est. Nunc vero, non quasi iam nuptam mulierem Mariam pronuntiaverunt, sed quasi nihilominus feminam, etiamsi non sponsam, quasi hoc a primordio dictam. Illud enim praeiudicet necesse est a quo forma descendit. Ceterum quod pertineat ad hoc capitulum, si hic desponsatae adaequatur, ut ideo mulier dicta sit Maria, non qua femina, sed qua maritata, iam ergo Christus non ex virgine natus est, quia ex desponsata, quae virgo esse desierit hoc nomine. Quod si ex virgine natus est, licet et desponsata, tamen integra, agnosce mulierem etiam virginem, etiam integram dici. Hic certe nihil prophetice dictum videri potest, ut futuram mulierem, id est nuptam, apostolus nominarit, dicendo factum ex muliere. Non enim poterat posteriorem mulierem nominare, de qua Christus nasci non habebat, id est virum passam, sed illa, quae erat praesens, quae erat virgo et mulier vocabatur post vocabuli huius proprietatem, secundum primordii formam virgini et ita universo mulierum generi defensam. ### English translation (Claude) Let us see now whether the apostle too observes the form of this word according to Genesis, assigning it to the sex, calling the virgin Mary a woman just as Genesis calls Eve. For writing to the Galatians he says, “God sent his Son, made of a woman,” who, it is agreed, was certainly a virgin, although Ebion resists. I recognize also that the angel Gabriel was sent to a virgin. But when he blesses her, he reckons her among women, not among virgins: “Blessed are you among women.” The angel too knew that a virgin is also called woman. But someone has thought himself clever in answering these two points: that because Mary was betrothed, she was therefore declared a woman by both the angel and the apostle; for a betrothed woman is in a way married. Yet between “in a way” and “truly” there is a great difference, at least in this passage; elsewhere, indeed, it should be held so. But here they declared Mary a woman not as though she were already married, but as a female nonetheless, even if she had not been betrothed, as one called this from the beginning. For the source from which the form descends must decide the case. Otherwise, as regards this chapter, if she is here treated as betrothed, so that Mary was called woman not as a female but as a wife, then Christ was not born of a virgin, because he was born of a betrothed woman, who by this name ceased to be a virgin. But if he was born of a virgin, betrothed indeed, yet intact, recognize that a virgin, an intact one at that, is also called woman. Here certainly nothing can seem to have been said prophetically, as though the apostle named a future woman, that is, a married one, by saying “made of a woman”. For he could not name the later woman, of whom Christ was not to be born, that is, one who had known a man, but only the one who was present, who was a virgin and was called woman according to the proper sense of this word, which, following the original form, was kept for the virgin and so for the whole race of women. ### Scripture references - Gal 4:4: quotation, high confidence - Luke 1:27: allusion, high confidence - Luke 1:28: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Ebion is the supposed founder of the Ebionites, who denied the virgin birth. The quotations and allusions are Gal 4:4, Luke 1:26–27, and Luke 1:28 (1:42). ### Citation (SBL) Tertullian, Virg. 6 (Oehler 1:891–892; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/1/#p-6). ## On the Veiling of Virgins 7 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/1/#p-7 - Source: Oehler 1:892–894 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: All Paul's reasons for veiling women apply equally or more to virgins: the man as head, the shame of a shorn head, woman as man's glory, and above all the angels, who fell through desire for the daughters of men, that is, for virgins. ### Latin text Convertamur ad ipsas iam rationes recensendas per quas apostolus docet velari feminam oportere, an eaedem etiam virginibus competant, ut ex hoc quoque vocabuli communio inter virgines et non virgines constet, dum eaedem velaminis causae in utraque parte deprehenduntur. Si caput mulieris vir est, utique et virginis, de qua fit mulier illa quae nupsit, nisi si virgo tertium genus est monstruosum aliquod sui capitis. Si mulieri turpe est radi sive tonderi, utique et virgini. Proinde viderit saeculum aemulum dei, si ita virgini caesum capillum decori mentitur, quemadmodum et puero permissum. Ergo cui aeque non convenit radi sive tonderi, aeque convenit operiri. Si gloria viri est mulier, quanto magis virgo, quae et gloria sibi est? Si mulier ex viro et propter virum, costa illa Adae virgo primum fuit. Si mulier potestatem habere super caput debet, vel eo iustius virgo, ad quam pertinet quod in causa est. Si enim propter angelos, scilicet quos legimus a deo et caelo excidisse ob concupiscentiam feminarum, quis praesumere potest tales angelos maculata iam corpora et humanae libidinis reliquias desiderasse, ut non ad virgines potius exarserint, quarum flos etiam humanam libidinem excusat? Nam et scriptura sic suggerit: Et factum est, inquit, cum coepissent homines plures fieri super terram, et filiae natae sunt eis; conspicati autem filii dei filias hominum, quod pulchrae essent, acceperunt sibi uxores ex omnibus quas elegerunt. Hic enim nomen mulierum Graecum uxores sapit, quia de nuptiis mentio est. Cum ergo filias hominum dicit, manifeste virgines portendit, quae adhuc apud parentes deputarentur (nam nuptae maritorum nuncupantur), cum potuerit dixisse uxores hominum, aeque non adulteros nominans angelos, sed maritos, dum innuptas sumunt filias hominum, quas natas supra dixit, sic quoque virgines significans. Supra natas, at hic angelis nuptas. Aliud eas nescio quam natas et dehinc nuptas. Debet ergo adumbrari facies tam periculosa, quae usque ad caelum scandala iaculata est, ut coram deo adsistens, cui rea est angelorum exterminatorum, ceteris quoque angelis erubescat, et malam illam aliquando libertatem capitis sui comprimat, iam nec hominum oculis offerendam. Sed etsi contaminatas iam feminas angeli illi appetissent, tanto magis propter angelos virgines velari debuissent, quanto magis propter virgines angeli deliquisse potuissent. Si autem et naturae praeiudicium adicit apostolus, quod honor sit mulieris redundantia capillorum, quia coma pro operimento est, utique hoc maxime virgini insigne est, quarum et ornatus ipse proprie sic est, ut concumulata in verticem ipsam capitis arcem ambitu crinium contegat. ### English translation (Claude) Let us turn now to reviewing the very reasons by which the apostle teaches that a female ought to be veiled, to see whether the same apply to virgins as well, so that from this too the sharing of the word between virgins and non-virgins may be established, when the same reasons for the veil are found on both sides. If the man is the head of the woman, surely he is also the head of the virgin, from whom comes that woman who has married; unless the virgin is some monstrous third kind, with a head of its own. If it is shameful for a woman to be shaved or shorn, surely it is for a virgin too. Let the world, God's rival, see to it, if it falsely claims that cropped hair becomes a virgin, as it is permitted to a boy. So for her whom it equally does not befit to be shaved or shorn it is equally fitting to be covered. If the woman is the glory of the man, how much more the virgin, who is also a glory to herself? If the woman is from the man and for the man, that rib of Adam was first a virgin. If the woman ought to have authority on her head, the virgin all the more rightly, since she is the one whom the reason concerns. For if it is “because of the angels”, namely those we read fell from God and heaven through desire for women, who can presume that such angels desired bodies already stained, the leavings of human lust, and did not rather burn for virgins, whose bloom excuses even human lust? For Scripture too suggests this: “And it came to pass,” it says, “when men had begun to multiply on the earth, and daughters were born to them, that the sons of God, seeing that the daughters of men were beautiful, took wives for themselves from all whom they chose.” Here the Greek word for women means wives, because marriage is mentioned. So when it says “daughters of men”, it plainly points to virgins, who were still reckoned as belonging to their parents (for married women are named after their husbands), whereas it could have said “wives of men”; likewise it names the angels not adulterers but husbands, since they take unmarried daughters of men, whom it said above were born, so signifying virgins in this way too: born above, but here married to angels. I know them as nothing other than born and then married. So a face so dangerous, which has hurled stumbling blocks as far as heaven, ought to be shaded, so that, standing before God, before whom it stands accused of the angels' banishment, it may blush before the other angels too, and restrain that evil freedom of its head, no longer to be offered even to the eyes of men. But even if those angels had desired women already defiled, all the more should virgins be veiled because of the angels, since all the more could the angels have sinned because of virgins. And if the apostle also adds the prejudgment of nature, that abundance of hair is a woman's honour, because hair serves as a covering, surely this is above all the mark of a virgin, whose very adornment is properly of this kind, that, heaped up on the crown, it covers the very citadel of the head with a ring of hair. ### Scripture references - 1 Cor 11:3: allusion, high confidence - 1 Cor 11:6: allusion, high confidence - 1 Cor 11:7: allusion, high confidence - 1 Cor 11:8: allusion, high confidence - Gen 2:22: allusion, high confidence - 1 Cor 11:10: quotation, high confidence - Gen 6:1: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 11:15: allusion, high confidence ### Extrabiblical texts - 1 En. 6–7 (1 Enoch): allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Tertullian reads “because of the angels” (1 Cor 11:10) in the light of the fallen angels of Gen 6:1–2 and the Enoch tradition (1 En. 6–7). The references are 1 Cor 11:3, 6, 7, 8–9, 10, 14–15, Gen 2:22, and Gen 6:1–2. ### Citation (SBL) Tertullian, Virg. 7 (Oehler 1:892–894; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/1/#p-7). ## On the Veiling of Virgins 8 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/1/#p-8 - Source: Oehler 1:894–895 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Paul's reasons for leaving men uncovered apply to boys as well as grown men, and his “every woman” likewise includes virgins; the Corinthians, to whom he wrote, still veil their virgins. ### Latin text Horum certe omnium contraria efficiunt, ne vir caput velet, scilicet quia non sit naturaliter consecutus ambitionem capillorum, quia radi sive tonderi non sit turpe illi, quia non propter illum angeli exorbitarint, quia gloria et imago dei sit, quia caput eius Christus. Itaque cum de viro et muliere apostolus tractet cur illam oporteat velari, illum vero non, apparet cur et virginis silentium fecerit, eadem ratione scilicet virginem in muliere intellegendam sinens, qua et puerum ut in viro deputandum non nominavit, totum ordinem utriusque sexus propriis vocabulis complexus, mulieris et viri. Sic etiam Adam adhuc integer vir in Genesi est cognominatus: Vocabitur, inquit, mulier, quia de viro suo sumpta est. Sic vir Adam ante nuptiarum congressum, quemadmodum et Eva mulier. De utraque parte satis ad universam speciem cuiusque sexus apostolus pronuntiavit, et breviter et plene tam instructa definitione, Omnis, inquit, mulier. Quid est omnis, nisi omnis generis, omnis ordinis, omnis condicionis, omnis dignitatis, omnis aetatis? siquidem omne totum est et integrum et nulla sui parte defectum. Pars autem mulieris et virgo est. Aeque et de viro non velando, Omnis, inquit. Ecce duo diversa nomina, vir et mulier. Omnis uterque. Duae leges obnoxiae invicem, hinc velandi, inde nudandi. Igitur si eo, quod dictum sit omnis vir, commune est nomen viri etiam nondum viri, masculi investis, commune autem cum sit nomen secundum naturam, communis est et lex non velandi eius qui inter viros virgo est, secundum disciplinam, cur non praeiudicatum sit proinde et mulierem virginem omnem muliere nominata contineri consortio nominis, ut contineatur et communione legis? Si virgo mulier non est, nec vir investis est. Si non operitur virgo, quia mulier non sit, operiatur investis, quia vir non sit. Eiusdem virginitatis aequa sit venia. Sicut virgines non coguntur velari, ita pueri non iubeantur revelari. Cur ex parte definitionem apostoli agnoscimus absolutam circa omnem virum, nec retractamus quare non et puerum nominarit, ex parte autem praevaricamur, aeque absoluta ea circa omnem mulierem? Si quis, inquit, contentiosus est, nos talem consuetudinem non habemus, neque ecclesia dei. Ostendit contentionem aliquam de ista specie fuisse ad quam extinguendam toto compendio usus est, neque virginem nominans, ut ostenderet dubitandum de velanda non esse, et omnem nominans mulierem, cum nominasset virginem. Sic et ipsi Corinthii intellexerunt. Hodie denique virgines suas Corinthii velant. Quid docuerint apostoli qui didicerunt approbant. ### English translation (Claude) Certainly the opposites of all these apply to the man, so that he does not veil his head: because he has not by nature received an abundance of hair; because it is not shameful for him to be shaved or shorn; because it was not on his account that the angels went astray; because he is the glory and image of God; because his head is Christ. So when the apostle treats of the man and the woman, why she ought to be veiled and he not, it is clear why he was silent about the virgin as well: for the same reason, namely, letting the virgin be understood in the woman, for which he did not name the boy either, as being reckoned in the man, embracing the whole order of each sex by their proper words, woman and man. So too Adam, while still untouched, is called man in Genesis: “She shall be called woman,” it says, “because she was taken from her man.” So Adam was a man before the union of marriage, just as Eve was a woman. On both sides the apostle declared enough to cover the whole species of each sex, briefly and fully, with so well-furnished a definition: “Every woman,” he says. What does “every” mean, if not of every kind, every order, every condition, every rank, every age? For “every” is whole and entire and lacking in no part of itself. And the virgin is a part of woman. Likewise, about the man not being veiled, he says, “Every.” See: two different names, man and woman; “every” for each; two laws answering each other, on the one side of veiling, on the other of uncovering. If, then, from the fact that it says “every man”, the name of man is common also to one not yet a man, the beardless male, and since the name is common according to nature, the law of not veiling is also common according to discipline for him who among men is a virgin, why should it not likewise be taken as settled that, when woman is named, every virgin woman too is contained in the sharing of the name, so as to be contained also in the fellowship of the law? If a virgin is not a woman, neither is a beardless youth a man. If the virgin is not covered because she is not a woman, let the beardless youth be covered because he is not a man. Let the same virginity receive equal indulgence: as virgins are not compelled to be veiled, so let boys not be ordered to be unveiled. Why, on the one side, do we recognize the apostle's definition as absolute concerning every man, and not ask why he did not name the boy too, while on the other side we evade it, though it is equally absolute concerning every woman? “If anyone,” he says, “is contentious, we have no such custom, nor has the church of God.” He shows that there had been some contention on this point, to extinguish which he used this whole summary, not naming the virgin, to show that there should be no doubt about veiling her, and naming every woman, whereby he had named the virgin. So the Corinthians themselves understood it. Indeed to this day the Corinthians veil their virgins. What the apostles taught, those who learned it approve. ### Scripture references - 1 Cor 11:7: allusion, high confidence - 1 Cor 11:3: allusion, high confidence - Gen 2:23: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 11:5: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 11:4: allusion, high confidence - 1 Cor 11:16: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - The references are 1 Cor 11:3–16 (especially verses 4–5, 7, 10, 14, and 16) and Gen 2:23. ### Citation (SBL) Tertullian, Virg. 8 (Oehler 1:894–895; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/1/#p-8). ## On the Veiling of Virgins 9 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/1/#p-9 - Source: Oehler 1:895–897 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Women may not speak, teach, baptize, or offer in church, and virgins share this condition; so they have no special right to go unveiled, and Tertullian rebukes a bishop who enrolled a young virgin among the widows. ### Latin text Videamus nunc, an sicut naturae et causae argumenta virgini quoque competere monstravimus, ita etiam disciplinae ecclesiasticae praescripta de muliere in virginem spectant. Non permittitur mulieri in ecclesia loqui, sed nec docere, nec tinguere, nec offerre, nec ullius virilis muneris, nedum sacerdotalis officii sortem sibi vindicare. Quaeramus, an aliquid horum virgini liceat. Si virgini non licet, sed in omnibus eadem condicione subicitur, et necessitas humilitatis cum muliere censetur, unde illi unum hoc licebit quod omni feminae non licet? Quid praerogativae meretur adversus condicionem suam, si qua virgo est, et carnem suam sanctificare proposuit? Idcirco velaminis venia fit illi, ut in ecclesiam notabilis et insignis introeat, ut honorem sanctitatis in libertate capitis ostendat? Potuit dignius honorari aliqua praerogativa virilis aut gradus aut officii. Plane scio alicubi virginem in viduatu ab annis nondum viginti collocatam. Cui si quid refrigerii debuerat episcopus, aliter utique salvo respectu disciplinae praestare potuisset, ne tale nunc miraculum, ne dixerim monstrum, in ecclesia denotaretur, virgo vidua, hoc quidem portentuosior, quod nec qua vidua caput texit, utrumque se negans, et virginem, quae vidua deputetur, et viduam, quae virgo dicatur. Sed ea auctoritate illic sedet intecta qua et virgo, ad quam sedem praeter annos sexaginta non tantum univirae, id est nuptae, aliquando eliguntur, sed et matres, et quidem educatrices filiorum, scilicet ut experimentis omnium affectuum structae et facile norint ceteras et consilio et solatio iuvare, et ut nihilominus ea decucurrerint per quae femina probari potest. Adeo nihil virgini ad honorem de loco permissum est. ### English translation (Claude) Let us see now whether, just as we have shown that the arguments from nature and from the reason given apply to the virgin as well, so too the prescriptions of church discipline concerning the woman also have the virgin in view. A woman is not permitted to speak in church, nor to teach, nor to baptize, nor to offer, nor to claim for herself a share in any function belonging to a man, still less in the priestly office. Let us ask whether any of these is permitted to a virgin. If it is not permitted to a virgin, but she is subject to the same condition in everything, and the necessity of humility is reckoned for her together with the woman, how will this one thing be permitted to her which is not permitted to any female? What prerogative does she deserve against her condition, if she is a virgin and has resolved to sanctify her flesh? Is she granted dispensation from the veil for this, that she may enter the church conspicuous and marked out, that she may display the honour of holiness in the freedom of her head? She could more worthily have been honoured by some prerogative of a man's rank or office. I know plainly that somewhere a virgin not yet twenty years old was placed in the order of widows. If the bishop owed her some relief, he could surely have provided it otherwise, with due regard for discipline, so that such a marvel, not to say monstrosity, should not now be pointed out in the church: a virgin widow; all the more portentous in that she did not cover her head even as a widow, denying herself both ways, both as a virgin, since she is reckoned a widow, and as a widow, since she is called a virgin. But she sits there uncovered by the same authority as a virgin; whereas to that seat are chosen, besides their being sixty years old, not only women who have had one husband, that is, who have been married, but mothers, and indeed those who have brought up children, so that, trained by the experience of all the affections, they may readily know how to help the others with counsel and comfort, and so that they may have passed through the things by which a female can be proved. So nothing by way of honour is allowed a virgin on the ground of her place. ### Scripture references - 1 Cor 14:34: allusion, high confidence - 1 Tim 2:12: allusion, high confidence - 1 Tim 5:9: allusion, high confidence ### Translation notes - “Offer” (offerre) means to offer the Eucharist. The order of widows required women over sixty who had had one husband (univirae) and had brought up children (1 Tim 5:9–10). The allusions are 1 Cor 14:34–35, 1 Tim 2:12, and 1 Tim 5:9–10. ### Citation (SBL) Tertullian, Virg. 9 (Oehler 1:895–897; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/1/#p-9). ## On the Veiling of Virgins 10 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/1/#p-10 - Source: Oehler 1:897–898 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: If virgins deserved a visible mark of honour, male virgins and the continent, whose struggle is harder, would deserve it more; since men have none, women should have none either. ### Latin text Sic nec de aliquibus insignibus. Ceterum satis inhumanum, si feminae quidem per omnia viris subditae honorigeram notam virginitatis suae praeferant, qua suspiciantur et circumspiciantur et magnificentur a fratribus, viri autem tot virgines, tot spadones voluntarii, caeco bono suo incedant, nihil gestantes quod et ipsos faceret illustres. Debebunt enim et ipsi aliqua sibi insignia defendere, aut pennas Garamantum, aut stropulos barbarorum, aut cicadas Atheniensium, aut cirros Germanorum, aut stigmata Britonum: aut ex diverso fiat, capite velati in ecclesia lateant. Certi sumus spiritum sanctum magis masculis tale aliquid subscribere potuisse, si feminis subscripsisset, cum praeter sexus auctoritatem etiam ipsius continentiae nomine masculos potius honorari oportuisset. Quorum quanto sexus avidior et caldior in feminas, tanto continentia maioris laboratior ideoque dignior omni ostentatione, si ostentatio virginitatis est dignitas. Non enim et continentia virginitati antistat, sive viduorum, sive qui ex consensu contumeliam communem iam recusaverunt? Nam virginitas gratia constat, continentia vero virtute. Non concupiscendi cui concupiscendo inoleveris grande certamen est. Cuius autem concupiscendi ignoraveris fructum, facile non concupisces, adversarium non habens, concupiscentiam fructus. Quomodo ergo non magis viris aliquid tale deus in honorem subscripsisset. vel quia familiariori scilicet imagini suae, vel quia plus laboranti? Si autem nihil masculo, multo magis feminae. ### English translation (Claude) The same holds for any other marks of distinction. For it would be quite unjust if females, who are subject to men in everything, should display a mark of honour for their virginity, by which they would be looked up to, gazed at, and extolled by the brothers, while men, so many virgins, so many voluntary eunuchs, went about with their good unseen, wearing nothing that would make them conspicuous too. For they too will have to claim some insignia for themselves: the feathers of the Garamantes, or the headbands of the barbarians, or the golden cicadas of the Athenians, or the topknots of the Germans, or the tattoos of the Britons; or else, the other way round, let them hide in church with their heads veiled. We are sure that the Holy Spirit would rather have granted some such thing to males, if he had granted it to females, since, besides the authority of their sex, males ought rather to be honoured on the ground of continence as well. The more eager and hot their sex is for women, the more laborious their continence, and so the worthier of every display, if the display of virginity is a dignity. For does not continence also surpass virginity, whether that of widowers, or of those who by consent have already renounced their common indignity? For virginity rests on grace, but continence on virtue. It is a great struggle not to desire what you have grown used to desiring. But what you have never known the fruit of desiring, you will easily not desire, having no adversary, the desire for that fruit. How, then, would God not rather have granted some such honour to men, either as being more closely his own image or as labouring more? But if nothing was granted to the male, much less to the female. ### Scripture references - Matt 19:12: allusion, high confidence - 1 Cor 7:5: echo, low confidence ### Translation notes - “Their common indignity” (contumeliam communem) refers to marital intercourse, which some married couples renounced by agreement. The allusion is Matt 19:12 (voluntary eunuchs). ### Citation (SBL) Tertullian, Virg. 10 (Oehler 1:897–898; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/1/#p-10). ## On the Veiling of Virgins 11 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/11/#p-11 - Source: Oehler 1:898–901 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Virgins should be veiled not from birth but from puberty, when, like Adam and Eve after the fall, they become aware of their sex; Rebecca veiled herself on first seeing her bridegroom, and nature and time make a girl a woman whether or not she is betrothed. ### Latin text Sed quod supra intermisimus ex parte subsecutae disputationis, ne cohaerentiam eius dispergeremus, nunc responso expungemus. Ubi enim gradum fiximus de apostoli absoluta definitione, omnem mulierem etiam omnis aetatis intellegendam, responderi ex diverso habebat ergo a nativitate et a primo nomine aetatis virginem operiri oportere. Non ita est autem, sed ex quo se intellegere coeperit et sensum naturae suae intrare et de virginis exire et pati novum illud quod alterius aetatis est. Nam et principes generis Adam et Eva, quamdiu intellectu carebant, nudi agebant. At ubi de arbore agnitionis gustaverunt, nihil primum senserunt quam erubescendum. Ita sui quique sexus intellectum tegmine notaverunt. Sed etsi propter angelos velanda est, sine dubio ab ea aetate lex velaminis operabitur a qua potuerunt filiae hominum concupiscentiam sui adducere et nuptias pati. Ex illo enim virgo desinit ex quo potest non esse. Et ideo penes Israël illicitum est ad virum tradere nisi post contestatam sanguine maturitatem; ita ante hunc indicem acerba res est. Igitur si tam diu virgo quamdiu acerba est, desinit virginem cum matura cognoscitur, et ut non virgo iam legi applicatur, sicut et nuptiis. Et desponsatae quidem habent exemplum Rebeccae, quae cum ad sponsum ignotum adhuc ignota perduceretur, simul ipsum cognovit esse quem de longinquo prospexerat, non sustinuit dexterae colluctationem nec osculi congressionem nec salutationis communicationem, sed confessa quod senserat, id est spiritu nuptam, negavit virginem velata ibidem. O mulierem iam de Christi disciplina! Ostendit enim etiam nuptias de aspectu et animo fieri, quemadmodum stuprum; nisi quod etiam Rebeccam quidam adhuc velant. De ceteris vero, id est quae desponsatae non sunt, viderit parentum procrastinatio ex angustiis vel scrupulositate descendens, viderit et ipsum continentiae votum. Nihil pertinet ad aetatem sua spatia currentem suaque debita maturitati luentem. Alia in occulto mater, natura, et alius in latenti pater, tempus, filiam suam legibus suis maritarunt. Aspice nuptam iam illam tuam virginem, et animam expectatione et carnem transfiguratione, cui tu secundum paras maritum. Iam et vox obsolefacta est, et membra completa sunt, et pudor ubique vestitur, et menses tributa dependunt, ac tu mulierem negas quam muliebria pati dicis? Si congressio viri mulierem facit, non tegantur nisi post ipsam nuptiarum passionem. Atquin etiam apud ethnicos velatae ad virum ducuntur. Si autem ad desponsationem velantur, quia et corpore et spiritu masculo mixtae sunt per osculum et dexteras, per quae primum resignarunt pudorem spiritu, per commune conscientiae pignus quo totam condixerunt confusionem, quanto magis tempus illas velabit, sine quo sponsari non possunt et quo urgente sine sponsalibus virgines desinunt esse? Tempus etiam ethnici observant, ut ex lege naturae iura sua aetatibus reddant. Nam feminas quidem a duodecim annis, masculum vero a duobus amplius ad negotia mittunt, pubertatem in annis, non sponsalibus aut nuptiis decernentes. Mater familiae vocatur, licet virgo, et pater familiae, licet investis. A nobis nec naturalia observantur, quasi alius sit deus naturae quam noster. ### English translation (Claude) But what we left aside above from part of the discussion that followed, so as not to break up its coherence, we will now settle with a reply. When we took our stand on the apostle's absolute definition, that every woman, of every age too, is to be understood, it could be answered from the other side that in that case a virgin ought to be covered from birth and from the first naming of her age. But it is not so; rather from the time when she has begun to understand herself, to enter into the sense of her nature, to go out from the state of a virgin, and to experience that new thing which belongs to another age. For the first parents of the race, Adam and Eve, as long as they lacked understanding, went about naked. But when they had tasted of the tree of knowledge, the first thing they felt was that they must blush. So each marked the understanding of their own sex with a covering. And if she must be veiled because of the angels, without doubt the law of the veil will take effect from the age at which the daughters of men could draw desire toward themselves and undergo marriage. For a virgin ceases to be one from the time she can cease to be one. And therefore in Israel it is unlawful to give her to a husband except after her maturity has been attested by blood; so before this sign the thing is unripe. So if she is a virgin as long as she is unripe, she ceases to be a virgin when she is recognized as ripe, and as no longer a virgin she becomes subject to the law, as she does to marriage. And betrothed girls indeed have the example of Rebecca, who, when she was being brought, still unknown, to a bridegroom still unknown, as soon as she recognized that he was the one she had seen from afar, did not wait for the clasp of the right hand, nor the meeting of a kiss, nor the exchange of greetings, but, confessing what she had perceived, that is, that she was married in spirit, denied that she was a virgin by veiling herself on the spot. O woman already of Christ's discipline! For she showed that marriage too, like unchastity, takes place by the look and the mind; except that some people still veil Rebecca too. As for the rest, that is, those who are not betrothed, let the delay of parents, arising from poverty or scrupulousness, see to it; let the vow of continence itself see to it. None of that concerns age, which runs its own course and pays its own debts to maturity. Another mother, nature, in secret, and another father, time, out of sight, have married their daughter by their own laws. Look at that virgin of yours, already married, in her soul by expectation and in her flesh by transformation, for whom you are preparing a second husband. Already her voice has changed, her limbs are complete, modesty clothes itself everywhere, the months pay their tributes; and do you deny that she is a woman, when you say she suffers womanly things? If union with a man makes a woman, let them not be covered until after the very experience of marriage. And yet even among the heathen brides are led veiled to their husbands. But if they are veiled at their betrothal, because in body and spirit they have been joined with a male by the kiss and the right hands, by which they first unsealed their modesty in spirit, by the common pledge of conscience by which they consented to the whole of their confusion, how much more will time veil them, without which they cannot be betrothed, and under whose pressure they cease to be virgins even without betrothal? Even the heathen observe time, so as to render to the ages their rights according to the law of nature. For they send females into public affairs from twelve years, but the male from two years later, determining puberty by years, not by betrothals or marriages. A woman is called mother of a family, though a virgin, and a man father of a family, though beardless. We do not observe even the things of nature, as though the God of nature were other than ours. ### Scripture references - Gen 2:25: allusion, high confidence - Gen 3:7: allusion, high confidence - 1 Cor 11:10: allusion, high confidence - Gen 6:2: allusion, high confidence - Gen 24:65: allusion, high confidence - Matt 5:28: echo, medium confidence ### Translation notes - “Unchastity” renders stuprum. “Some people still veil Rebecca too” is ironic: they allow veiling only to the betrothed. The allusions are Gen 2:25, Gen 3:7, 1 Cor 11:10, Gen 6:2, Gen 24:64–65, and Matt 5:28. ### Citation (SBL) Tertullian, Virg. 11 (Oehler 1:898–901; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/11/#p-11). ## On the Veiling of Virgins 12 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/11/#p-12 - Source: Oehler 1:901–902 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: A grown girl's body and her own grooming declare that she is a woman; it is inconsistent for her to claim virginity only by going bareheaded. ### Latin text Agnosce et mulierem, agnosce et nuptam de testimoniis et corporis et spiritus, quae patitur et in conscientia et in carne. Hae sunt tabellae priores naturalium sponsalium et nuptiarum. Impone velamen extrinsecus habenti tegumen intrinsecus. Tegantur etiam superiora cuius inferiora nuda non sunt. Vis scire quae sit aetatis auctoritas? Propone utramque, immutare compressam in habitu mulieris, et quae maturitate progressa in virginitate duret cum suo habitu: facilius illa mulier negabitur, quam ista virgo credetur. Tanta est adeo fides aetatis, ut nec habitu obstrui possit. Quid? quod etiam hae nostrae etiam habitu mutationem aetatis confitentur, simulque se mulieres intellexerunt, de virginibus educantur, a capite quidem ipso deponentes quod fuerunt: vertunt capillum et acu lasciviore comam sibi inserunt, crinibus a fronte divisis apertam professae mulieritatem. formae a speculo petunt, et faciem morosiorem lavacro macerant, forsitan et aliquo eam medicamine interpolant, pallium extrinsecus iactant, calceum stipant multiformem, plus instrumenti ad balneas deferunt. Quid singula persequar? Solae autem manifestae paraturae totam circumferunt mulieritatem, sed virginari volunt sola capitis nuditate, uno habitu negantes quod toto suggestu profitentur. ### English translation (Claude) Recognize her as a woman, recognize her as married, from the testimonies of body and spirit alike, which she experiences both in her conscience and in her flesh. These are the first tablets of a natural betrothal and marriage. Put a veil on the outside of one who has a covering on the inside. Let the upper parts be covered of one whose lower parts are not bare. Do you want to know what authority age has? Set two girls side by side: one [immature] who has been violated, in the dress of a woman, and one advanced in maturity who remains in virginity, in its dress: the former will more easily be denied to be a woman than the latter be believed a virgin. So great is the testimony of age that not even dress can obstruct it. What of the fact that these girls of ours also confess the change of age by their dress, and, as soon as they have understood themselves to be women, withdraw from among the virgins, putting away from their very head what they were? They alter their hair, and fasten their locks with a more wanton pin, professing open womanhood with the hair parted from the forehead. They seek their looks from the mirror, and soften a face grown too fastidious by washing, perhaps even touch it up with some cosmetic; they throw a mantle about them outside, pack their feet into shoes of many shapes, carry more equipment to the baths. Why should I pursue the details? Their evident preparations alone carry about the whole of womanhood; yet they want to play the virgin by the bareness of the head alone, denying by one item of dress what they profess by their whole apparel. ### Translation notes - “[Immature]” supplies the sense of immutare, which is corrupt in the digital text. The words lavacro macerant appear twice in the digital text; the first occurrence is a doubling and is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Tertullian, Virg. 12 (Oehler 1:901–902; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/11/#p-12). ## On the Veiling of Virgins 13 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/11/#p-13 - Source: Oehler 1:902–903 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Virgins who veil themselves in public but go bareheaded in church are seeking the brothers' praise, whereas Christ commands that good deeds, and above all the offering of one's own body, be done in secret for God alone. ### Latin text Si propter homines habitu abutuntur, impleant illum etiam in hoc, et ut apud ethnicos caput velant, certe in ecclesia virginitatem suam abscondant, quam extra ecclesiam celant. Timent extraneos, revereantur et fratres: aut constanter audeant et in vicis virgines videri, sicut audent in ecclesiis. Laudabo vigorem, si aliquid et apud ethnicos virginitatis nundinarint. Eadem natura foris quae et intus, eadem institutio apud homines et apud dominum eadem libertate constat. Quo ergo foris quidem bonum suum abstrudunt, in ecclesia vero provulgant? Exposco rationem. Utrumne ut fratribus suis placeant, an ut ipsi deo? Si ut ipsi deo, tam idoneus est ad conspicienda quaequae in occulto fiunt quam iustus ad remuneranda quae soli sibi fiunt. Denique praecipit, nihil debucinemus eorum quae apud illum mercedem merebuntur, nec ea ab hominibus compensemus. Quod si unius victoriati vel quamcunque eleemosynae operationem sinistra conscia facere prohibemur, quantum tenebrarum circumfundere debemus cum tantam oblationem deo offerimus ipsius corporis et ipsius spiritus nostri, cum illi ipsam naturam consecramus? Ergo quod non potest videri propter deum fieri, quia sic fieri deus non vult, sequitur ut hominum gratia fiat, utique primo illicitum, ut gloriae libidinosum. Gloria enim illicitum est eis quorum probatio in omni humiliatione constat. Et si a deo confertur continentiae virtus, quid gloriaris quasi non acceperis? Si vero non accepisti, quid habes quod datum tibi non est? Hoc ipso autem constat a deo datam tibi non esse, quod illam non soli deo praestas. Videamus ergo quod humanum est, an firmum sit et verum. ### English translation (Claude) If they misuse their dress for men's sake, let them carry it through in this respect too: as they veil the head among the heathen, let them certainly hide in church the virginity which they conceal outside the church. They fear strangers; let them also revere the brothers; or else let them have the constancy to dare to be seen as virgins in the streets too, as they dare in the churches. I will praise their vigour if they also put some of their virginity on the market among the heathen. Nature is the same outside as inside; the same institution stands by the same freedom before men and before the Lord. Why, then, do they hide their good outside but publish it in church? I demand a reason. Is it to please their brothers, or God himself? If God himself, he is as able to see whatever is done in secret as he is just to reward what is done for him alone. Indeed he commands us to trumpet abroad nothing of what will earn a reward with him, and not to be repaid for it by men. And if we are forbidden to do the work of a single small coin, or of any alms, with the left hand aware of it, how much darkness ought we to throw around us when we offer to God so great an oblation, of our very body and our very spirit, when we consecrate to him nature itself? Therefore what cannot be seen to be done for God's sake, because God does not want it done so, is done, it follows, for the sake of men, and so is first of all unlawful, as lusting after glory. For glory is unlawful for those whose proof consists in every humiliation. And if the virtue of continence is conferred by God, why do you boast as if you had not received it? But if you have not received it, what have you that has not been given to you? And by this very fact it is clear that it has not been given to you by God, that you do not render it to God alone. Let us see, then, whether what is human is firm and true. ### Scripture references - Matt 6:2: allusion, high confidence - Matt 6:3: allusion, high confidence - 1 Cor 4:7: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - The allusions are Matt 6:1–4 and 1 Cor 4:7. ### Citation (SBL) Tertullian, Virg. 13 (Oehler 1:902–903; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/11/#p-13). ## On the Veiling of Virgins 14 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/11/#p-14 - Source: Oehler 1:903–906 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Displaying virgins to attract others makes virginity a matter of glory and rivalry; some who fall conceal it by staying unveiled, some attempt to destroy their unborn children, and public admiration wears down modesty. ### Latin text Referunt aliquando dictum a quodam, cum primum quaestio ista temptata est, Et quomodo ceteras sollicitabimus ad huiusmodi opus? Scilicet felices nos facient, si plures erunt, et non dei gratia vel merita cuiusque. Virgines ecclesiam, an ecclesia virgines ornat deo sive commendat? Confessus est igitur gloriam esse in causa. Porro ubi gloria, illic sollicitatio, ubi sollicitatio, illic coactio, ubi coactio, illic necessitas, ubi necessitas, illic infirmitas. Merito itaque, dum caput non tegunt, ut sollicitentur gloriae causa, ventres tegere coguntur infirmitatis ruina. Aemulatio enim illas, non religio producit. Aliquando et ipse deus venter earum, quia facile virgines fraternitas suscipit. Nec tantum autem ruunt, sed et funem longum delictorum sibi attrahunt. Prolatae enim in medium et publicato bono suo elatae et fratribus omni honore et caritatis operatione cumulatae, dum non labent, ubi quid admissum est, tantum dedecoris cogitant quantum honoris habuerunt. Si intectum caput virginitati adscribitur, si qua virgo exciderit de gratia virginitatis, ne prodatur, intecto permanet capite, et tunc iam alieno ambulat habitu. Consciae mulieritatis iam indubitatae audent nudo capite ad deum adire. Sed aemulator deus et dominus, qui dixit, Nihil occultum quod non revelabitur, plerasque etiam in conspectum deducit. Non enim confitebuntur nisi ipsorum infantium suorum vagitibus proditae. Quantum autem plures, non etiam de pluribus sceleribus suspectas habebis? Dicam, licet nolim, difficile mulier semel fit quae timet fieri, quaeque iam facta potest virginem mentiri sub deo. Quanta item circa uterum suum audebit, ne etiam mater detegatur? Scit deus quot iam infantes et perfici et perduci ad partum integros iuverit debellatos aliquamdiu a matribus. Facillime semper concipiunt et felicissime pariunt huiusmodi virgines, et quidem simillimos patribus. Haec admittit flagitia coacta et invita virginitas. Ipsa concupiscentia non latendi non est pudica. Patitur aliquid quod virginis non sit, studium placendi utique et viris. Quantum velis bona mente conetur, necesse est publicatione sui periclitetur, dum percutitur oculis incertis et multis, dum digitis demonstrantium titillatur, dum nimium amatur, dum inter amplexus et oscula assidua concalescit. Sic frons duratur, sic pudor teritur, sic solvitur, sic discitur aliter iam placere desiderare. ### English translation (Claude) They report that someone once said, when this question was first raised, “And how shall we attract other girls to this kind of work?” Of course they will make us happy if they are more numerous, and not the grace of God or each one's merits! Do virgins adorn the church, or does the church adorn virgins, or commend them to God? He confessed, then, that glory is at the root of it. Now where there is glory, there is enticement; where enticement, compulsion; where compulsion, necessity; where necessity, weakness. Rightly, then, while they do not cover their heads, so as to be enticed for the sake of glory, they are forced to cover their bellies through the ruin of their weakness. For rivalry, not religion, brings them forward. Sometimes their very belly is their god as well, because the brotherhood readily supports virgins. And they do not only fall, but drag behind them a long rope of sins. For, brought forward into public view, elated by the publication of their good, loaded by the brothers with every honour and work of charity, as long as they do not fall, then, when something has been committed, they think of as much disgrace as they had honour. If an uncovered head is ascribed to virginity, then if any virgin has fallen from the grace of virginity, she remains bareheaded lest she be betrayed, and then she walks in a dress not her own. Conscious of a womanhood no longer in doubt, they dare to approach God with bare head. But the jealous God and Lord, who said, “Nothing is hidden that will not be revealed,” brings many of them into view as well. For they will not confess unless betrayed by the wailing of their own infants. And the more of them there are, will you not also suspect them of more crimes? I will say it, though I would rather not: one who fears to become a woman hardly becomes one only once, and one who has become one can lie that she is a virgin before God. How much, too, will she dare concerning her womb, lest she be discovered to be a mother as well? God knows how many infants he has helped to be perfected and brought whole to birth, after being fought against for some time by their mothers. Such virgins always conceive most easily and give birth most happily, and to children very like their fathers! These are the outrages that a forced and unwilling virginity commits. The very desire not to be hidden is not modest. It experiences something that is not a virgin's: the eagerness to please, and to please men at that. However much she may try with good intention, she must be endangered by the public display of herself, while she is struck by many and uncertain eyes, while she is tickled by the fingers of those who point her out, while she is loved too much, while she grows warm among constant embraces and kisses. So the forehead is hardened, so modesty is worn down, so it is loosened, so she learns to desire to please in another way. ### Scripture references - Phil 3:19: allusion, high confidence - Exod 20:5: allusion, medium confidence - Luke 8:17: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - The passage alludes to attempted abortions by virgins who had fallen, which Tertullian treats as grave crimes. The allusions and quotations are Phil 3:19, Exod 20:5, and Luke 8:17 (Matt 10:26). ### Citation (SBL) Tertullian, Virg. 14 (Oehler 1:903–906; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/11/#p-14). ## On the Veiling of Virgins 15 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/11/#p-15 - Source: Oehler 1:906–907 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: True virginity fears itself and hides under the veil as under armor, guarding against envy, the evil eye, and temptation, content to be known to God alone. ### Latin text Sed enim vera et tota et pura virginitas nihil magis timet quam semetipsam. Etiam feminarum oculos pati non vult. Alios ipsa oculos habet. Confugit ad velamen capitis quasi ad galeam, quasi ad clypeum, qui bonum suum protegat adversus ictus temptationum, adversus iacula scandalorum, adversus suspiciones et susurros et aemulationem, ipsum quoque livorem. Nam est aliquid etiam apud ethnicos metuendum, quod fascinum vocant, infeliciorem laudis et gloriae enormioris eventum. Hoc nos interdum diabolo interpretamur, ipsius est enim boni odium; interdum deo deputamus, illius est enim superbiae iudicium, extollentis humiles et deprimentis elatos. Timebit itaque virgo sanctior, vel in nomine fascini, hinc adversarium, inde deum, illius lividum ingenium, huius censorium lumen, et gaudebit sibi soli et deo nota. Sed et si cui innotuerit, sapit si temptationibus gradum obstruxerit. Quis enim audebit oculis suis premere faciem clausam, faciem non sentientem, faciem, ut dixerim, tristem? Quicunque malus cogitatus ipsa severitate frangetur. Iam se etiam mulierem negat quae virginem celat. ### English translation (Claude) But true, whole, and pure virginity fears nothing so much as itself. It does not want to bear even the eyes of women. It has other eyes of its own. It takes refuge in the veil of the head as in a helmet, as in a shield, to protect its good against the blows of temptations, against the darts of stumbling blocks, against suspicions and whispers and rivalry, and envy itself too. For there is something that even the heathen fear, which they call fascinum, the unhappy outcome of praise and glory beyond measure. We sometimes attribute this to the devil, for hatred of the good is his; sometimes we ascribe it to God, for the judgment of pride is his, who exalts the humble and brings down the lofty. So the holier virgin will fear, even under the name of fascinum, the adversary on the one side and God on the other: the envious nature of the one, the censor's eye of the other; and she will rejoice to be known to herself alone and to God. But even if she becomes known to someone, she is wise if she has blocked the path of temptations. For who will dare to press with his eyes upon a face that is closed, a face that does not respond, a face, if I may say so, that is stern? Any evil thought will be broken by that very severity. She who hides the virgin already denies that she is even a woman. ### Scripture references - Luke 1:52: echo, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Fascinum is the “evil eye” or bewitchment believed to follow excessive praise. “Exalts the humble and brings down the lofty” echoes Luke 1:52 (compare 1 Pet 5:5). The last sentence is compressed: a virgin who conceals her virginity under the veil gives up even being seen as a woman. ### Citation (SBL) Tertullian, Virg. 15 (Oehler 1:906–907; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/11/#p-15). ## On the Veiling of Virgins 16 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/11/#p-16 - Source: Oehler 1:907–908 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Scripture, nature, and discipline all point to the veil; Tertullian urges every virgin to veil her head, since she is already married to Christ. ### Latin text In his consistit defensio nostrae opinionis secundum scripturam, secundum naturam, secundum disciplinam. Scriptura legem condit, natura contestatur, disciplina exigit. Cui ex his consuetudo opinionis prodest, vel qui diversae sententiae color est? Dei est scriptura, dei est natura, dei est disciplina. Quicquid contrarium est istis, dei non est. Si scriptura incerta est, natura manifesta est, et de eius testimonio scriptura incerta non potest esse. Si de natura dubitatur, disciplina quid magis deo ratum sit ostendit. Nihil est illi carius humilitate, nihil acceptius modestia, nihil operosius gloria et studio hominibus placendi. Illud itaque sit tibi et scriptura et natura et disciplina quod ratum deo inveneris, sicut iuberis omnia examinare et meliora quaeque sectari. Superest etiam ut ad ipsas convertamur, quo libentius ista suscipiant. Oro te, sive mater, sive soror, sive filia virgo, secundum annorum nomina dixerim, vela caput: si mater, propter filios, si soror, propter fratres, si filia, propter patres. Omnes in te aetates periclitantur. Indue armaturam pudoris, circumduc vallum verecundiae, murum sexui tuo strue, qui nec tuos emittat oculos, nec admittat alienos. Adimple habitum mulieris, ut statum virginis serves. Mentire aliquid ex his quae intus sunt, ut soli deo exhibeas veritatem. Quamquam non mentiris nuptam. Nupsisti enim Christo, illi tradidisti carnem tuam, illi sponsasti maturitatem tuam. Incede secundum sponsi tui voluntatem. Christus est qui et alienas sponsas et maritatas velari iubet, utique multo magis suas. ### English translation (Claude) In these things the defense of our opinion consists: according to Scripture, according to nature, according to discipline. Scripture establishes the law, nature bears witness, discipline demands. To which of these does the custom of the opposite opinion appeal, or what is the pretext of the contrary view? Scripture is God's, nature is God's, discipline is God's. Whatever is contrary to these is not God's. If Scripture is uncertain, nature is plain, and with its testimony Scripture cannot be uncertain. If there is doubt about nature, discipline shows what is more approved by God. Nothing is dearer to him than humility, nothing more acceptable than modesty, nothing more hateful than glory and the eagerness to please men. So let that be for you Scripture and nature and discipline which you have found approved by God, as you are commanded to examine all things and to follow whatever is better. It remains for us also to turn to the virgins themselves, so that they may receive these things more willingly. I beg you, whether mother, or sister, or virgin daughter (let me speak by the names that go with the years), veil your head: if a mother, for your sons' sake; if a sister, for your brothers' sake; if a daughter, for your fathers' sake. All ages are endangered in you. Put on the armor of modesty, throw around you the rampart of shame, build a wall for your sex, which will neither let your eyes out nor let others' eyes in. Complete the dress of a woman, so as to keep the state of a virgin. Give a false show of something of what is within, so as to display the truth to God alone. And yet you do not falsely present yourself as married. For you have married Christ; to him you have handed over your flesh; to him you have betrothed your maturity. Walk according to the will of your bridegroom. It is Christ who commands that the brides and wives of others be veiled; all the more, surely, his own. ### Scripture references - 1 Thess 5:21: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 11:5: allusion, high confidence - 2 Cor 11:2: echo, medium confidence - Eph 6:11: echo, low confidence ### Translation notes - “Examine all things and follow whatever is better” is 1 Thess 5:21. “Nothing more hateful” renders operosius (literally “more laborious, more troublesome”); the sense is uncertain and may be corrupt. Christ's command about veiling refers to 1 Cor 11:5–6, which Tertullian treats as Christ speaking through the apostle. ### Citation (SBL) Tertullian, Virg. 16 (Oehler 1:907–908; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/11/#p-16). ## On the Veiling of Virgins 17 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/11/#p-17 - Source: Oehler 1:908–910 - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Tertullian warns married women against token head-coverings, citing Arabian women, a sister's vision of an angel, and the ostrich, and closes with a blessing. ### Latin text Sed et vos admonemus, alterius pudicitiae mulieres, quae in nuptias incidistis, ne sic a disciplina velaminis exolescatis, ne quidem in momento horae, ut, quia reicere illam non potestis, alio modo destruatis, neque tectae neque nudae incedentes. Mitris enim et lanis quaedam non velant caput, sed conligant, a fronte quidem protectae, qua proprie autem caput est, nudae. Aliae modice linteolis, credo ne caput premant, nec ad aures usque demissis, cerebro tenus operiuntur. Misereor, si tam infirmo auditu sunt, ut per tegmen audire non possint. Sciant quia totum caput mulier est. Limites et fines eius eo usque porriguntur unde incipit vestis. Quantum resoluti crines occupare possunt, tanta est velaminis regio, ut cervices quoque ambiantur. Ipsae enim sunt quas subiectas esse oportet, propter quas potestas supra caput haberi debet. Velamen iugum illarum est. Iudicabunt vos Arabiae feminae ethnicae, quae non caput, sed faciem quoque ita totam tegunt, ut uno oculo liberato contentae sint dimidiam frui lucem quam totam faciem prostituere. Mavult femina videre quam videri. Quas propterea infelicissimas ait Romana quaedam regina quod adamare magis quam adamari possint; cum sint vel ex alterius infelicitatis et quidem frequentioris immunitate felices, quia facilius adamari quam adamare feminae possint. Et ethnicae quidem disciplinae meracior et, ut ita dixerim, barbarior modestia. Nobis dominus etiam revelationibus velaminis spatia metatus est. Nam cuidam sorori nostrae angelus in somnis cervices, quasi applauderet, verberans, Elegantes, inquit, cervices et merito nudae! bonum est usque ad lumbos a capite reveleris, ne et tibi ista cervicum libertas non prosit. Et utique quod uni dixeris, omnibus dixeris. Quantam autem castigationem merebuntur etiam illae quae inter psalmos vel in quacunque dei mentione retectae perseverant, moraturae etiam in oratione ipsa facillime fimbriam aut villum aut quodlibet filum cerebro superponunt et tectas se opinantur? Tanti caput suum mentiuntur. Aliae, quibus plane maior est palma omni fimbria et filo, non minus capite suo abutuntur, ut bestia quaedam magis quam avis, licet pennata, brevi capite, protracta cervice, cetera altegradia. Hanc aiunt, cum delitescendum habet, caput solum plane totum in condensum abstrudere, reliquam se in aperto relinquere. Ita dum in capite secura est, nuda qua maior est capitur tota cum capite. Tales erunt et istae minus quam utile est tectae. Oportet ergo omni tempore et omni loco memores legis incedere, paratas et instructas ad omnem dei mentionem, qui si fuerit in pectore, cognoscetur et in capite feminarum. Haec cum bona pace legentibus, utilitatem consuetudini praeponentibus, pax et gratia a domino nostro Iesu redundet, cum Septimio Tertulliano, cuius hoc opusculum est. ### English translation (Claude) But we also warn you women of the other chastity, who have entered upon marriage, not to fall so far away from the discipline of the veil, not even for a moment of an hour, that, because you cannot throw it off, you destroy it another way, walking about neither covered nor bare. For some do not veil the head with turbans and woollen bands, but tie it up: protected in front, but bare where the head properly is. Others are covered only as far as the brain with small linen cloths, not even let down to the ears, I suppose so as not to press on the head. I pity them, if their hearing is so weak that they cannot hear through a covering. Let them know that the whole head is the woman. Its limits and boundaries reach as far as the point where the garment begins. As far as the unbound hair can reach, so far is the region of the veil, so that the neck too is enclosed. For it is the neck that must be subject, on account of which “authority ought to be had over the head.” The veil is their yoke. The heathen women of Arabia will judge you, who cover not only the head but the whole face, so that with one eye left free they are content to enjoy half the light rather than prostitute the whole face. A woman would rather see than be seen. For this reason a certain Roman queen said they were most unhappy, because they could fall in love more than be loved; although they are in fact happy in being free of another unhappiness, and a more frequent one, since women can more easily be loved than love. And the modesty of heathen discipline is purer and, if I may say so, more barbarous. For us the Lord has even measured out the extent of the veil by revelations. For to a certain sister of ours an angel in her sleep, striking her neck as if applauding it, said: “Elegant neck, and rightly bare! It is good that you are uncovered from the head down to the loins, lest this freedom of the neck be of no profit to you either.” And surely what you have said to one, you have said to all. But what great punishment will those women deserve who stay uncovered even during the psalms or at any mention of God, who, even when they are about to spend time in prayer itself, very readily put a fringe or a tuft or any thread on top of the head and think themselves covered? So small do they falsely make their head out to be! Others, whose palm is plainly larger than any fringe or thread, abuse their head no less, like a certain beast, more beast than bird, though feathered, small-headed, long-necked, and for the rest high-stepping. They say that when it has to hide, it thrusts its head alone, quite wholly, into a thicket and leaves the rest of itself in the open. So while it is safe in its head, it is caught whole, head and all, where it is bare and larger. Such will these women be too, covered less than is useful. Therefore at all times and in every place they ought to walk mindful of the law, ready and prepared for every mention of God; if he is in their heart, he will be recognized also on women's heads. To those who read these things in good peace, putting usefulness before custom, may peace and grace from our Lord Jesus overflow, together with Septimius Tertullian, whose little work this is. ### Scripture references - 1 Cor 11:10: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 11:3: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - “Authority ought to be had over the head” is 1 Cor 11:10; “the head of the woman” recalls 1 Cor 11:3. The Roman queen's saying is unidentified. The angel's words to “a sister of ours” are a revelation of the kind Tertullian's New Prophecy circle valued; it is reported as he gives it. “Whose palm is larger than any fringe” means that some cover the head only with the hand. The long-necked bird is the ostrich; the Latin altegradia (“high-stepping”) is unusual and uncertain. ### Citation (SBL) Tertullian, Virg. 17 (Oehler 1:908–910; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/tertullian-virginibus/11/#p-17).