Creating Lustful looks and being Catholic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Seeker5
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
But dressing in order to look good (that is, “look sexy”) has one purpose and one purpose alone - to create lust. To distinguish, one can dress to “look decent” (that is, presentable, or, stretching it, fashionable), in which it is not a sin in any case, as we are not commanded to wear sackcloth and ashes (only those of us who can hear it should, as Jesus would have said, and not all have that charism), or dressing to “look good/sexy” (that is, to create lust in the opposite sex), in which case one is in sin whether one succeeds or fails.
 
Khalid said:
But dressing in order to look good .
Click to expand...
One does not have to dress in order to “look good” in a overtly “sexy” way that we would associate with seeking to provoke lust.

And Women do it for all sorts of reasons…and a good number of women do so in a way that is rather unconscious of the effects. As Bl. Pope John Paul II (prior being a blessed or Pope) wrote in Love and Responsibility -women need to be educated (my words) as to the effects on Men of their actions. They for example are not as visual (in these terms) as men are. They do not experience concupscience in the same way as men.

But in any case I imagine many Christian women or others of good will who are not seeking to incite lust intentionally will buy at times immodest fashions-- for such is what are being promoted often and are lauded by their friends …in order to simply “look good” or attractive…or “beautiful”. Not with the intention of inciting lust.

One of the reasons a “new evangelization” of modesty (of a reasonable sort) is needed at times as part of the new evangelization. Women can be honestly not realizing various factors due to the surrounding culture as well as their different make up from men (pun intended).
 
Bookcat said:
One does not have to dress in order to “look good” in a overtly “sexy” way that we would associate with seeking to provoke lust.

And Women do it for all sorts of reasons…and a good number of women do so in a way that is rather unconscious of the effects.
Click to expand...
(I hope this post is not out of line - if it is I will remove it or edit it.)

The Power of Low Self-Esteem:**
From what I’m gathering for 99.999999% of these people I think it’s a choice based on denial powered by low-self-esteem. **

May I have an example of a modern American Catholic woman who would fit this role of **“rather unconscious of the effects” of her dress on men? **I’m guessing this person would be a very rare. And very secluded. And very unaware of her attraction level. And very uninformed. And possibly in denial.

For the rest of the women who do understand american male “attraction” I see it as a priority choice of the woman. The woman simply puts her **low self-esteem **at a higher priority of the sin of inciting lust. She justifies her action of “dressing/dancing sexy” and claims innocence because dressing/dancing “sexy” is **subjective **(and she’s doing it to “feel pretty”, etc).

Further, it is possible that women take these actions to also alleviate some sexual desires. How? Because the male “attention” energy is very gratifying for them…being desired….the desire to be desired… this all creates sexual tension and is just as gratifying as the physical aspects… But much safer and somewhat more innocent (or so they think)… beautiful women get this attention all the time (and the gift of free items/courtesies(opening doors, etc)). Average looking women long for it because they’ve experience this attention infrequently and unattractive women have a harder time relating to it.

The Power of Low Self-Esteem trumps most things and empowers Denial.
(Note: I’m using the gender “woman” in the examples below but “man” could be used of course)

I appreciate the insight from you all. Thank you.
 
it doesn’t matter how they dress, men are going to lust—we can’t help it
 
Seeker5 said:
(I hope this post is not out of line - if it is I will remove it or edit it.)

The Power of Low Self-Esteem:**
From what I’m gathering for 99.999999% of these people I think it’s a choice based on denial powered by low-self-esteem. **

May I have an example of a modern American Catholic woman who would fit this role of **“rather unconscious of the effects” of her dress on men? **I’m guessing this person would be a very rare. And very secluded. And very unaware of her attraction level. And very uninformed. And possibly in denial.

For the rest of the women who do understand american male “attraction” I see it as a priority choice of the woman. The woman simply puts her **low self-esteem **at a higher priority of the sin of inciting lust.
Click to expand...
A good number of women may not know the effects

Read “Love and Responsibility” as noted above.

Also one must distinguish between dressing for the “effects” of reasonable attraction…and lust.

As to ‘self esteem’…I do use such concepts …🙂

May modesty and charity …and prudence guide all.
 
Bookcat said:
I will stay with what I wrote there 🙂 …I like to distinguish more there …always distinguish" as the scholastics would say.

I can just hear some woman saying “but I am not wearing it in order to cause lust…but just to look good (thats my intention)…the lust is his problem” –though most virtuous men would tell her that it was a very immodest choice….the lust does not have to be lets say the direct “intention” in order for there to be sin on her part…scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s1c1a4.htm#I

But I do understand what your getting – if she knowing does what she knows will cause lust in say most --well she is in a way “intending it” though she is not setting out toward that goal per se…

And yes of course it can happen that a woman is quite innocent --due to invincible ignorance etc.

And yes it is not only the end result that matters…
Click to expand...
I would not consider a man who shifts responsibility for his lust – to a woman – as a “virtuous” man.
 
Walking_Home said:
I would not consider a man who shifts responsibility for his lust – to a woman – as a “virtuous” man.
Click to expand...
a… this is taken out of context.

Of course anyone who lusts is not at that moment a virtuous man.

A woman does of course have a responsibility to be modest and a man has a responsibility to not lust etc …but such was not the point of what I was writing there. It was read too fast --out of context.
 
severus68 said:
I agree. No one is virtuous by virtue only of judging and seeing sin where there is none.
Click to expand...
In this case such was not the case. The virtuous men judged correctly that the woman was dressed immodestly.
 
Bookcat said:
40.png
severus68:
I agree. No one is virtuous by virtue only of judging and seeing sin where there is none.
Click to expand...
In this case such was not the case. The virtuous men judged correctly that the woman was dressed immodestly.
Click to expand...
A virtuous man – would not judge a person by the clothes – but would see another human being with a Christian attitude – as a child of God.
 
Walking_Home said:
Clothes are neutral — it is what is already planted on ones mind – that caused lust. The “fraternal correction” – should be focused on “correcting” – the darkness that lives within.
Click to expand...
Our bodies are our tools for displaying what is within. Think about this example for a second. Lets say one of my friends who is a woman liked to dress very scantily. She was not trying to draw attention to herself or cause lustful thoughts on purpose though. She has no intention to sin. However because of how she was dressed this caused me to have lustful thoughts and I noticed this was a common thing among the men she came into contact with.

While of course I should strive for heroic virtue and a direly wish to have the eyes of God in seeing her as he does no matter what she is wearing, this just is not the case for me and not the case for most of the other men she is coming into contact with. Would it be wrong to mention something to her in the interest of asking her to dress more modestly to help myself and others look upon her as God wishes her to be seen in her full dignity? Or should I stop being friends with her and refuse to see her until I perfect my ability to see chastely to the point I can be around her without being led to lust?
 
Nate13 said:
Our bodies are our tools for displaying what is within. Think about this example for a second. Lets say one of my friends who is a woman liked to dress very scantily. She was not trying to draw attention to herself or cause lustful thoughts on purpose though. She has no intention to sin. However because of how she was dressed this caused me to have lustful thoughts and I noticed this was a common thing among the men she came into contact with.

While of course I should all strive for heroic virtue and a direly wish to have the eyes of God in seeing her as he does no matter what she is wearing, this just is not the case for me and not the case for most of the other men she is coming into contact with. Would it be wrong to mention something to her in the interest of asking her to dress more modestly to help myself and others look upon her as God wishes her to be seen in her full dignity? Or should I stop being friends with her and refuse to see her until I perfect my ability to see chastely to the point I can be around her without being led to lust?
Click to expand...
We as Christians – should see them as children of God – no matter the clothes worn. Placing the responsibility of women to --“help you” –
— has the opposite affect – for it lessens the effort – you place on yourself – to actually correct – what is in the mind – since you are depended on someone else to do the work.

As is said below – we are not to hold another accountable – transfer the responsibility – the blame – make another the cause – for our own sin.
POST-SYNODAL APOSTOLIC EXHORTATION
RECONCILIATION AND PENANCE
OF JOHN PAUL II
TO THE BISHOPS CLERGY AND FAITHFUL
ON RECONCILIATION AND PENANCE
IN THE MISSION OF THE CHURCH TODAY
Click to expand...
Personal Sin and Social Sin
Click to expand...
  1. Sin, in the proper sense, is always a personal act, since it is an act of freedom on the part of an individual person and not properly of a group or community. This individual may be conditioned, incited and influenced by numerous and powerful external factors. He may also be subjected to tendencies, defects and habits linked with his personal condition. In not a few cases such external and internal factors may attenuate, to a greater or lesser degree, the person’s freedom and therefore his responsibility and guilt.** But it is a truth of faith, also confirmed by our experience and reason, that the human person is free. This truth cannot be disregarded in order to place the blame for individuals’ sins on external factors such as structures, systems or other people**. Above all, this would be to deny the person’s dignity and freedom, which are manifested-even though in a negative and disastrous way-also in this responsibility for sin committed. Hence there is nothing so personal and untransferable in each individual as merit for virtue or responsibility for sin.
Click to expand...
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_jp-ii_exh_02121984_reconciliatio-et-paenitentia_en.html
Click to expand...
 
Walking_Home said:
Clothes are neutral — it is what is already planted on ones mind – that caused lust.
Click to expand...
The person is responsible to dress modestly. As Jesus tells us temptations will come but woe to him (her in this case) by which the come…

Catechism of the Catholic Church

2521 Purity requires modesty, an integral part of temperance. Modesty protects the intimate center of the person. It means refusing to unveil what should remain hidden. It is ordered to chastity to whose sensitivity it bears witness. It guides how one looks at others and behaves toward them in conformity with the dignity of persons and their solidarity.

2522 Modesty protects the mystery of persons and their love. It encourages patience and moderation in loving relationships; it requires that the conditions for the definitive giving and commitment of man and woman to one another be fulfilled. Modesty is decency. It inspires one’s choice of clothing. It keeps silence or reserve where there is evident risk of unhealthy curiosity. It is discreet.

2523 There is a modesty of the feelings as well as of the body. It protests, for example, against the voyeuristic explorations of the human body in certain advertisements, or against the solicitations of certain media that go too far in the exhibition of intimate things. Modesty inspires a way of life which makes it possible to resist the allurements of fashion and the pressures of prevailing ideologies.

2524 The forms taken by modesty vary from one culture to another. Everywhere, however, modesty exists as an intuition of the spiritual dignity proper to man. It is born with the awakening consciousness of being a subject. Teaching modesty to children and adolescents means awakening in them respect for the human person.

2525 Christian purity requires a purification of the social climate. It requires of the communications media that their presentations show concern for respect and restraint. Purity of heart brings freedom from widespread eroticism and avoids entertainment inclined to voyeurism and illusion.

2526 So called moral permissiveness rests on an erroneous conception of human freedom; the necessary precondition for the development of true freedom is to let oneself be educated in the moral law. Those in charge of education can reasonably be expected to give young people instruction respectful of the truth, the qualities of the heart, and the moral and spiritual dignity of man.
 
Walking_Home said:
We as Christians – should see them as children of God – no matter the clothes worn. Placing the responsibility of women to --“help you” –
— has the opposite affect – for it lessens the effort – you place on yourself – to actually correct – what is in the mind – since you are depended on someone else to do the work.

As is said below – we are not to hold another accountable – transfer the responsibility – the blame – make another the cause – for our own sin.
Click to expand...
I’m not, I’m asking her to help me in my weakness… I love how you immediately take the stance of someone under attack. I’ll take it your answer is I stop being friends with her until I gain the necessary heroic virtue…
 
Walking_Home said:
The “fraternal correction” – should be focused on “correcting” – the darkness that lives within.
Click to expand...
““Being concerned for each other” also entails being concerned for their spiritual well-being. Here I would like to mention an aspect of the Christian life, which I believe has been quite forgotten: fraternal correction in view of eternal salvation. Today, in general, we are very sensitive to the idea of charity and caring about the physical and material well-being of others, but almost completely silent about our spiritual responsibility towards our brothers and sisters. This was not the case in the early Church or in those communities that are truly mature in faith, those which are concerned not only for the physical health of their brothers and sisters, but also for their spiritual health and ultimate destiny. The Scriptures tell us: “Rebuke the wise and he will love you for it. Be open with the wise, he grows wiser still, teach the upright, he will gain yet more” (Prov 9:8ff). Christ himself commands us to admonish a brother who is committing a sin (cf. Mt 18:15). The verb used to express fraternal correction - elenchein – is the same used to indicate the prophetic mission of Christians to speak out against a generation indulging in evil (cf. Eph 5:11). The Church’s tradition has included “admonishing sinners” among the spiritual works of mercy. It is important to recover this dimension of Christian charity. We must not remain silent before evil. I am thinking of all those Christians who, out of human regard or purely personal convenience, adapt to the prevailing mentality, rather than warning their brothers and sisters against ways of thinking and acting that are contrary to the truth and that do not follow the path of goodness. Christian admonishment, for its part, is never motivated by a spirit of accusation or recrimination. It is always moved by love and mercy, and springs from genuine concern for the good of the other. As the Apostle Paul says: “If one of you is caught doing something wrong, those of you who are spiritual should set that person right in a spirit of gentleness; and watch yourselves that you are not put to the test in the same way” (Gal 6:1). In a world pervaded by individualism, it is essential to rediscover the importance of fraternal correction, so that together we may journey towards holiness. Scripture tells us that even “the upright falls seven times” (Prov 24:16); all of us are weak and imperfect (cf. 1 Jn 1:8). It is a great service, then, to help others and allow them to help us, so that we can be open to the whole truth about ourselves, improve our lives and walk more uprightly in the Lord’s ways. There will always be a need for a gaze which loves and admonishes, which knows and understands, which discerns and forgives (cf. Lk 22:61), as God has done and continues to do with each of us.”

–Pope Benedict XVI from message for Lent 2012
 
Nate13 said:
40.png
Walking_Home:
We as Christians – should see them as children of God – no matter the clothes worn. Placing the responsibility of women to --“help you” –
— has the opposite affect – for it lessens the effort – you place on yourself – to actually correct – what is in the mind – since you are depended on someone else to do the work.

As is said below – we are not to hold another accountable – transfer the responsibility – the blame – make another the cause – for our own sin.
Click to expand...
I’m not, I’m asking her to help me in my weakness… I love how you immediately take the stance of someone under attack. I’ll take it your answer is I stop being friends with her until I gain the necessary heroic virtue…
Click to expand...
By asking her to --“help you in your weakness/change her mode of dress” – you are indeed – transferring/shifting responsibility for your thoughts – onto her. And – if you are lusting after her – are you really her friend.
 
Bookcat said:
The person is responsible to dress modestly. As Jesus tells us temptations will come but woe to him (her in this case) by which the come…

Catechism of the Catholic Church

2521 Purity requires modesty, an integral part of temperance. Modesty protects the intimate center of the person. It means refusing to unveil what should remain hidden. It is ordered to chastity to whose sensitivity it bears witness. It guides how one looks at others and behaves toward them in conformity with the dignity of persons and their solidarity.

2522 Modesty protects the mystery of persons and their love. It encourages patience and moderation in loving relationships; it requires that the conditions for the definitive giving and commitment of man and woman to one another be fulfilled. Modesty is decency. It inspires one’s choice of clothing. It keeps silence or reserve where there is evident risk of unhealthy curiosity. It is discreet.

2523 There is a modesty of the feelings as well as of the body. It protests, for example, against the voyeuristic explorations of the human body in certain advertisements, or against the solicitations of certain media that go too far in the exhibition of intimate things. Modesty inspires a way of life which makes it possible to resist the allurements of fashion and the pressures of prevailing ideologies.

2524 The forms taken by modesty vary from one culture to another. Everywhere, however, modesty exists as an intuition of the spiritual dignity proper to man. It is born with the awakening consciousness of being a subject. Teaching modesty to children and adolescents means awakening in them respect for the human person.

2525 Christian purity requires a purification of the social climate. It requires of the communications media that their presentations show concern for respect and restraint. Purity of heart brings freedom from widespread eroticism and avoids entertainment inclined to voyeurism and illusion.

2526 So called moral permissiveness rests on an erroneous conception of human freedom; the necessary precondition for the development of true freedom is to let oneself be educated in the moral law. Those in charge of education can reasonably be expected to give young people instruction respectful of the truth, the qualities of the heart, and the moral and spiritual dignity of man.
Click to expand...
 
Bookcat said:
““Being concerned for each other” also entails being concerned for their spiritual well-being. Here I would like to mention an aspect of the Christian life, which I believe has been quite forgotten: fraternal correction in view of eternal salvation. Today, in general, we are very sensitive to the idea of charity and caring about the physical and material well-being of others, but almost completely silent about our spiritual responsibility towards our brothers and sisters. This was not the case in the early Church or in those communities that are truly mature in faith, those which are concerned not only for the physical health of their brothers and sisters, but also for their spiritual health and ultimate destiny. The Scriptures tell us: “Rebuke the wise and he will love you for it. Be open with the wise, he grows wiser still, teach the upright, he will gain yet more” (Prov 9:8ff). Christ himself commands us to admonish a brother who is committing a sin (cf. Mt 18:15). The verb used to express fraternal correction - elenchein – is the same used to indicate the prophetic mission of Christians to speak out against a generation indulging in evil (cf. Eph 5:11). The Church’s tradition has included “admonishing sinners” among the spiritual works of mercy. It is important to recover this dimension of Christian charity. We must not remain silent before evil. I am thinking of all those Christians who, out of human regard or purely personal convenience, adapt to the prevailing mentality, rather than warning their brothers and sisters against ways of thinking and acting that are contrary to the truth and that do not follow the path of goodness. Christian admonishment, for its part, is never motivated by a spirit of accusation or recrimination. It is always moved by love and mercy, and springs from genuine concern for the good of the other. As the Apostle Paul says: “If one of you is caught doing something wrong, those of you who are spiritual should set that person right in a spirit of gentleness; and watch yourselves that you are not put to the test in the same way” (Gal 6:1). In a world pervaded by individualism, it is essential to rediscover the importance of fraternal correction, so that together we may journey towards holiness. Scripture tells us that even “the upright falls seven times” (Prov 24:16); all of us are weak and imperfect (cf. 1 Jn 1:8). It is a great service, then, to help others and allow them to help us, so that we can be open to the whole truth about ourselves, improve our lives and walk more uprightly in the Lord’s ways. There will always be a need for a gaze which loves and admonishes, which knows and understands, which discerns and forgives (cf. Lk 22:61), as God has done and continues to do with each of us.”

–Pope Benedict XVI from message for Lent 2012
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top