At what point does something become a near occasion of sexual sin?

[howgreathouart]

Hi! I have a question that I’ve been asking priests about for a while, and I keep being given unclear answers. I’m possibly about to sound really scrupulous, but I’m sincerely concerned about this.

I understand that deliberating seeking sexual arousal outside of marriage is sinful. I also understand that placing yourself in a situation in which sexual arousal is likely to occur is very likely a near occasion of sin. (Right?)

But my question is…what if the things you know, from past experience, are likely to cause sexual arousal are…not at all sexual in nature? What if they’re actually perfectly innocent and chaste? (I’m talking really innocent. Holding hands. Sitting close together. And no impure thoughts involved.) Would you then have an obligation to stop engaging in those actions because to do so would be to place yourself in a near occasion of sin? That just doesn’t seem very practical.

Further, since daydreaming about sexual situations is sinful, if we were to say that, in the above situation, it is a near occasion of sin to engage in those sorts of innocent behaviors, would it also be a near occasion of sin to daydream about them? Such that, not only could you not hold your SO, but you also couldn’t even THINK about doing so? And would the moral status of the daydreams change depending on whether the daydreams themselves resulted in sexual arousal? Or if they ever led to actually impure thoughts? (I’m sure we can agree that daydreaming isn’t a good use of time or anything, but I’m trying to figure out what would constitute a near occasion of mortal sin, not just poor time management.)

Basically, I’d just like to get a really clear definition of how exactly we can know if something is a near occasion of sin so that I don’t accidentally put myself in one or drive myself crazy for no reason. Thank you!

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

Hi! I have a question that I’ve been asking priests about for a while, and I keep being given unclear answers. I’m possibly about to sound really scrupulous, but I’m sincerely concerned about this.

I understand that deliberating seeking sexual arousal outside of marriage is sinful. I also understand that placing yourself in a situation in which sexual arousal is likely to occur is very likely a near occasion of sin. (Right?)

But my question is…what if the things you know, from past experience, are likely to cause sexual arousal are…not at all sexual in nature? What if they’re actually perfectly innocent and chaste? (I’m talking really innocent. Holding hands. Sitting close together. And no impure thoughts involved.) Would you then have an obligation to stop engaging in those actions because to do so would be to place yourself in a near occasion of sin? That just doesn’t seem very practical.

Further, since daydreaming about sexual situations is sinful, if we were to say that, in the above situation, it is a near occasion of sin to engage in those sorts of innocent behaviors, would it also be a near occasion of sin to daydream about them? Such that, not only could you not hold your SO, but you also couldn’t even THINK about doing so? And would the moral status of the daydreams change depending on whether the daydreams themselves resulted in sexual arousal? Or if they ever led to actually impure thoughts? (I’m sure we can agree that daydreaming isn’t a good use of time or anything, but I’m trying to figure out what would constitute a near occasion of mortal sin, not just poor time management.)

Basically, I’d just like to get a really clear definition of how exactly we can know if something is a near occasion of sin so that I don’t accidentally put myself in one or drive myself crazy for no reason. Thank you!

Big confusion. Let me try to distinguish point by point.

I understand that deliberating seeking sexual arousal outside of marriage is sinful.

What is this? I do not know how to do this…

I also understand that placing yourself in a situation in which sexual arousal is likely to occur is very likely a near occasion of sin.

Sexual arousal is sin? Sexual arousal is animal, belongs to the body and you can hardly do anything about it unless you wear a burkha and even so …

But my question is…what if the things you know, from past experience, are likely to cause sexual arousal are…not at all sexual in nature?

Like, for instance, taking a hot shower that may provoke a male erection… Do you avoid taking shower and start smelling like a pig ?

What if they’re actually perfectly innocent and chaste? (I’m talking really innocent. Holding hands. Sitting close together. And no impure thoughts involved.) Would you then have an obligation to stop engaging in those actions because to do so would be to place yourself in a near occasion of sin? That just doesn’t seem very practical.

Oh! It is that!. Well, holding hand, well, ok. Sitting close…depends how close … There is almost close, close, closer, closest, till you are 2 in 1. Of course, that is not practical, because when you start being close, you only stop in the point you know…

Further, since daydreaming about sexual situations is sinful, if we were to say that, in the above situation, it is a near occasion of sin to engage in those sorts of innocent behaviors, would it also be a near occasion of sin to daydream about them? Such that, not only could you not hold your SO, but you also couldn’t even THINK about doing so? And would the moral status of the daydreams change depending on whether the daydreams themselves resulted in sexual arousal? Or if they ever led to actually impure thoughts?

The human psyche is 95% unconscious and 5% conscious and subconscious. Listen. UN-conscious. UN=not conscious. Daydreaming is there and you cannot do much about it.

Basically, I’d just like to get a really clear definition of how exactly we can know if something is a near occasion of sin so that I don’t accidentally put myself in one or drive myself crazy for no reason.

I think you are going the wrong way, measuring the millimeters. And you are forgetting the other person. If the other woman it too attractive, the farthest possible the better. If you hate the other person, it is different.

Besides, you must agree with the other person where you want to reach. That is a decision you have to make both. Cannot be done by you alone. If one wants sexual relations and the other no, we’ve got a problem that you must agree up. If you do not agree, the millimeters do not matter. If she wants to have sexual relations with you and you dont, if you approach her you cannot avoid and escape and you will fall like a sardine into the bait.

Now, I suppose that you were not referring to yourself as married, for if it is so, nothing of what I said is valid.

 

[JRKH]

I am afraid that you are trying to approach this matter in some static and unchanging way when such things are dynamic. This is why you cannot get a clear answer.

Allow me to approach this matter by analogy…

Say you are trying to lose weight. You determine to go on a diet.
Certain foods, certain habits, etc become off limits and are contrary to the goal of the diet.
At the same time you cannot [entirely remove yourself from “temptation” since food is also necessary for your physical health.
Yet - Since you know that even the smell or thought of chocolate, or some other rich food will likely cause you to seek it out and eat it, you naturally determine to avoid these temptations…

BUT -

To be truly successful on the diet, that is to take off the weight and keep it off, you know that you must retrain your body to like and enjoy good foods in proper portions and to enjoy “bad” foods only within their proper contexts.
It is this “retraining” - the encouragement of good habit and the suppression/destruction of bad habits that lead to the more healthy lifestyle.

So - let’s compare this to your problem.

That which is “near occasion of sin” is like the bad habits and something that should indeed be avoided - even if it seems fairly “innocent” in and of itself.
But there is so much more to this than just deciding if it’s safe to hold hands or not. One needs to explore why something nominally innocent leads to impure thoughts. One needs to seek out the problem and change the behavior through mental and spiritual discipline. In common terms this might be called “behavior modification”, in spiritual terms, it is called, “Growing in holiness”.

If holding hands leads to impure thoughts - then you can choose to change the behavior (not hold hands) OR you can change the thoughts by seeking and practicing more good, loving, Christlike thoughts and behaviors.

Not sure I’ve explained this well, but I hope it helps some.

Peace
James

 

[Archedreamer]

I use to recognise that I am driving near an occasion of sin when I put on ridiculous postages for self-justify the sin I will commit :For example, If I want to see pornography but I don’t want to assume it, I think for my self “Well, I have not a sexual interest, I have just an artistic one…(yes, of course…)”.

 

[Bookcat]

ewtn.com/expert/answers/dating.htm from a writer at EWTN …it will be of great help!

(One note though on this reading…I would note that when they say “as soon as he begins to enjoy…” under “pure intent”… it would mean before knowing consent…)

Near occasions for mortal sins are that which either by their nature or for a particular person — generally lead one to commit a mortal sin. (Or by their nature generally lead most people to commit mortal sin.)

 

[Bookcat]

A near occasion for a mortal sin is some thing or person or place etc what generally leads one to commit a particular mortal sin…or likely will cause one to commit the mortal sin in question.

Such can be of a nature that it generally leads most to sin…or particular to a person.

Ordinarily we are obliged to avoid such. Though there can be exceptions.

It is not just a temptation per se. Often times one must be around certain temptations due to duty or the simply the society we live in.

And it is not a “remote occasion” where one could be tempted but generally one does not fall. Such are often in our society.

There can also be “necessary” occasions…one can speak with ones confessor in regards to such.

Now of course if something generally does not lead one to mortal sin…but one sees that here and now it will…well one avoids it!

A good confessor too can help one judge.

 

[howgreathouart]

Thank you to all of you who responded. I just wanted to clarify:

That which is “near occasion of sin” is like the bad habits and something that should indeed be avoided - even if it seems fairly “innocent” in and of itself.
But there is so much more to this than just deciding if it’s safe to hold hands or not. One needs to explore why something nominally innocent leads to impure thoughts. One needs to seek out the problem and change the behavior through mental and spiritual discipline. In common terms this might be called “behavior modification”, in spiritual terms, it is called, “Growing in holiness”.

If holding hands leads to impure thoughts - then you can choose to change the behavior (not hold hands) OR you can change the thoughts by seeking and practicing more good, loving, Christlike thoughts and behaviors.

Not sure I’ve explained this well, but I hope it helps some.

Peace
James

I’m not talking about a situation where you know that something innocent has led you to sin in the past. For instance, holding hands leading to impure thoughts. I’m talking about something innocent leading to arousal which COULD lead to impure thoughts. Obviously the arousal is beyond anyone’s control. It might go away with more maturity and experience. I think there’s probably an element of “desensitization” at play here where, when you do something more, your body becomes used to it and reacts less strongly, but I’ve also heard of situations where it didn’t actually go away with experience…it was happening up through the wedding day. I guess we all just have different levels of sensitivity?

But anyway. I’m trying to figure out if arousal itself makes something a near occasion of sin, or if you’d need to have a history of actually committing sin after? And that’s the distinction between a temptation and a near occasion of sin?

If we say that you’d need to have a history of actually committing sin (so it’s not just that you’re aroused, but that you DO something with the arousal), would that mean that, if there is no such history, it’s okay to keep putting yourself in a situation where you’re likely to become aroused? Because it’s a temptation, not a near occasion of sin?

 

[Bookcat]

Thank you to all of you who responded. I just wanted to clarify:

I’m not talking about a situation where you know that something innocent has led you to sin in the past. For instance, holding hands leading to impure thoughts. I’m talking about something innocent leading to arousal which COULD lead to impure thoughts.

But anyway. I’m trying to figure out if arousal itself makes something a near occasion of sin, or if you’d need to have a history of actually committing sin after? And that’s the distinction between a temptation and a near occasion of sin?

If we say that you’d need to have a history of actually committing sin (so it’s not just that you’re aroused, but that you DO something with the arousal), would that mean that, if there is no such history, it’s okay to keep putting yourself in a situation where you’re likely to become aroused? Because it’s a temptation, not a near occasion of sin?

ewtn.com/expert/answers/dating.htm from a writer at EWTN …it will be of great help!

(One note though on this reading…I would note that when they say “as soon as he begins to enjoy…” under “pure intent”… it would mean before knowing consent…)

Please go to the above link --it will clarify some things for you.

You may find some helpful thoughts here too on one aspect: jimmyakin.com/2009/01/appreciating-beauty-vs-concupiscence.html

 

[JRKH]

Thank you to all of you who responded. I just wanted to clarify:

I’m not talking about a situation where you know that something innocent has led you to sin in the past. For instance, holding hands leading to impure thoughts. I’m talking about something innocent leading to arousal which COULD lead to impure thoughts. Obviously the arousal is beyond anyone’s control. It might go away with more maturity and experience. I think there’s probably an element of “desensitization” at play here where, when you do something more, your body becomes used to it and reacts less strongly, but I’ve also heard of situations where it didn’t actually go away with experience…it was happening up through the wedding day. I guess we all just have different levels of sensitivity?

But anyway. I’m trying to figure out if arousal itself makes something a near occasion of sin, or if you’d need to have a history of actually committing sin after? And that’s the distinction between a temptation and a near occasion of sin?

If we say that you’d need to have a history of actually committing sin (so it’s not just that you’re aroused, but that you DO something with the arousal), would that mean that, if there is no such history, it’s okay to keep putting yourself in a situation where you’re likely to become aroused? Because it’s a temptation, not a near occasion of sin?

Again - I think that you are treating something dynamic as though it were static.

The person who finds themselves aroused by a certain here-to-for “innocent” action has no experience with this (most likely going through puberty). They are learning and likely confused so, hopefully, they will seek the counsel of an adult they trust (parent or confessor).
But now comes the issue of, as you say above, they, “keep putting yourself in a situation where you’re likely to become aroused…” One cannot repeatedly expose themselves as though they are “innocent” - that is, without experience.
Instead they are faced with a situation where they have more knowledge and experience and thus culpability increases for what they might do with the unintended arousal.

The what you need to determine is this. Are you going to allow your life to be controlled by “unwanted thoughts” that speak to spiritual imperfections? Or are you going to seek to ferret out these imperfections (the tendency toward impure thoughts in certain situations) so that you can overcome this problem and not be bothered by such temptation to impure thought.

The journey is dynamic and ever changing…

Peace
James

 

[Romulus]

Instead of making a new thread, I decided to add my post here…seem to be in regards to the same topic of the OP.

Here is a scenario:
“An unmarried catholic envisioned herself/himself married in the future . And in this vision the catholic was spooning their spouse in the wee morning hrs of the day; both naked. The catholic initiated the spooning in a selfless act to make their spouse feel desired, feel warmth, feel protected and most importantly, feel blissful. There was no sexual arousal between them, there was no seeking and basking in sexual pleasure. They did not treat themselves as objects of sexual pleasure. But they both were seeking and basking in the mutual feeling of togetherness and feeling grateful that God had brought them together so that they can be one flesh. Grateful to God of the gift they received, the gift of each other.”

The spouse envisioned by the unmarried catholic may or may not exist. For we cannot prove or disprove whether someone has been gifted a spouse, will be gifted a spouse or will never be gifted a spouse by God.

Case1:
If the envisioned spouse exist, but hasn’t been revealed or discerned, there is no way of knowing for sure about their physical traits I.e height, hair color, skin tone etc… So the vision of the spouse is clouded in mystery, they possibly could resemble a person known to the unmarried catholic, but is not the person. Has The unmarried catholic had a deliberate impure thought/vision fantasy? Or just had a pure innocent hopeful thought?

Case2:
If the envisioned spouse doesn’t exist, the unmarried catholic is not called to marriage, then the spouse envisioned is a fantasy and is fictitious. If so, wouldn’t this be “disordered”, spooning a fictitious person ? Has The unmarried catholic had a deliberate impure thought/vision, Therefore Sinned?

In either case, if the unmarried catholic has a history of losing self-control of this vision, this is an example of refusing to avoid the near occasion of sin; and this is a SIN itself?

Thanks for the feedback everyone!