K
khiveley
Guest
Nudity in itself in not inherently wrong. Indicating so would require us to throw out Michaelangelo’s David and other works of art as deviant works of pornography. The creator of the work itself does not make the work moral or immoral, but the intent of its creation. There would be some nudity in movies and art that is pornographic in nature because it would not respect the dignity of the human person being displayed. God created the human body as a sacramental sign of Him, to tell something of His divine nature through the human body. We are created in his image and likeness.
Nudity is acceptable when it does not respect the dignity of the subject being portrayed (for instance a crude scene in a teen comedy) vs. portrayal of the abject horror of the gas chambers of Auschwitz in *Schindler’s List * or the authentic portrayal of authentic indigenous tribal peoples in The Mission.
It would also stand to reflect upon why the individual was desiring to pay for a movie with the intention of seeing the nudity. Was this desire inspired by lust or authentic love? If done from the desire to seek personal fulfillment from the viewing of the images, then yes it would be sinful. If it was done with understanding that the imagery was respectful to the person being portrayed, then it would prove to be moral. Also, one must know his or her own response to the imagery. If it does not create arousal in him or her it would be okay, within the context already defined. This last rule, should not be viewed in itself alone as a rule, but conditional also to the intent of the artist or film maker.
Nudity is acceptable when it does not respect the dignity of the subject being portrayed (for instance a crude scene in a teen comedy) vs. portrayal of the abject horror of the gas chambers of Auschwitz in *Schindler’s List * or the authentic portrayal of authentic indigenous tribal peoples in The Mission.
It would also stand to reflect upon why the individual was desiring to pay for a movie with the intention of seeing the nudity. Was this desire inspired by lust or authentic love? If done from the desire to seek personal fulfillment from the viewing of the images, then yes it would be sinful. If it was done with understanding that the imagery was respectful to the person being portrayed, then it would prove to be moral. Also, one must know his or her own response to the imagery. If it does not create arousal in him or her it would be okay, within the context already defined. This last rule, should not be viewed in itself alone as a rule, but conditional also to the intent of the artist or film maker.