Culpability in Sin with Sex Outside of Marriage

[LindyPhil]

When a woman and a man engage in intercourse outside of marriage, who is the victim and who is the abuser? Is there one? Is culpability lying solely on the shoulders of the man? Does woman share some blame in the act that transpired?

What about the case of a lustful woman who tempts a man into sin (by her words of suggestive dressing/language/actions). Is it any different? Does he use her or does she use him?

Thank you,

Phil

 

[dulcissima]

When a woman and a man engage in intercourse outside of marriage, who is the victim and who is the abuser? Is there one? Is culpability lying solely on the shoulders of the man? Does woman share some blame in the act that transpired?

What about the case of a lustful woman who tempts a man into sin (by her words of suggestive dressing/language/actions). Is it any different? Does he use her or does she use him?

Thank you,

Phil

They are both in a state of mortal sin, cut off from God, so it is really rather pointless to point fingers and try to guess who is more to blame. It really doesn’t matter whether one is male or female or how one dressed or acted. Each is responsible for their own chastity.

 

[countertenor]

they’d only be in a state of mortal sin if they knew it was wrong. Not everyone is raised with the idea that they are supossed to be married before they can have sex. Especially in our society today

 

[Rach620]

When a woman and a man engage in intercourse outside of marriage, who is the victim and who is the abuser? Is there one?

As long as it is not a case of rape, I’m not sure it can be so easily broken down like that.

Is culpability lying solely on the shoulders of the man? Does woman share some blame in the act that transpired?

Each individual person chooses to have sex, so each is morally culpable for his or her actions.

Why wouldn’t the woman be blamed herself? We have sexual urges as well, and free wills of our own. We are not completely passive creatures, and are culpable when we fall to concupiscence just as men are.

What about the case of a lustful woman who tempts a man into sin (by her words of suggestive dressing/language/actions). Is it any different? Does he use her or does she use him?

She would also be guilty of tempting another to sin, but that doesn’t absolve the man from his freely chosen action to have sex with her (again, given that we’re not speaking of rape here). Both are using one another for sexual pleasure; both are guilty of sin.

 

[96ucfgrad]

This question was posed in a larger discussion about a woman who was considering aborting her child. The father of the child advised her to abort her child, stating “Get it taken care of.”

Anytime a woman is advised by anyone to abort her child, she is victimized. She is told that her feminine genius is worthless and that her only “responsible option” is to kill her own child. Man has a particular responsibility to defend the feminine genius- and advice to abort a child is an agressive attack against that.

The question of culpability is an interesting one that should be posed, but is irrelevant in regards to the above stated respect which was the topic of our earlier discussion.

 

[Joan_M]

This question was posed in a larger discussion about a woman who was considering aborting her child. The father of the child advised her to abort her child, stating “Get it taken care of.”

Anytime a woman is advised by anyone to abort her child, she is victimized. She is told that her feminine genius is worthless and that her only “responsible option” is to kill her own child. Man has a particular responsibility to defend the feminine genius- and advice to abort a child is an agressive attack against that.

The question of culpability is an interesting one that should be posed, but is irrelevant in regards to the above stated respect which was the topic of our earlier discussion.

Receiving advice to abort her child does not victimize the woman. How could that be? She received advice, she does not have to take it. Forcing her to abort would be victimizing her, as well as murdering the child.

I believe that such advice says far more about the one giving the advice than about the receipient of it!

 

[Island_Oak]

Anytime a woman is advised by anyone to abort her child, she is victimized. She is told that her feminine genius is worthless and that her only “responsible option” is to kill her own child. Man has a particular responsibility to defend the feminine genius- and advice to abort a child is an agressive attack against that…

The “feminine genius” is a new theory to me and sounds more DaVinci Code than Catholic. Either which way, mankind has a moral obligation to avoid encouraging, procuring or soliciting from others conduct which is immoral. This duty arises not out of deference to some real or imagined feminine genius–but because man’s utmost duty is to God. Within the Catholic Church this requires men and women to comply with the moral order that the Church, informed by Scriptures, Tradition, teachings and natural law, has identified–paramount to which is the prohibition against the taking of innocent human life, including that which is pore-born.

 

[96ucfgrad]

The “feminine genius” is a new theory to me and sounds.

LETTER OF POPE JOHN PAUL II
TO WOMEN

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_let_29061995_women_en.html

The Church sees in Mary the highest expression of the “feminine genius” and she finds in her a source of constant inspiration. Mary called herself the “handmaid of the Lord” (Lk 1:38). Through obedience to the Word of God she accepted her lofty yet not easy vocation as wife and mother in the family of Nazareth. Putting herself at God’s service, she also put herself at the service of others: a service of love. Precisely through this service Mary was able to experience in her life a mysterious, but authentic “reign”. It is not by chance that she is invoked as “Queen of heaven and earth”. The entire community of believers thus invokes her; many nations and peoples call upon her as their “Queen”. For her, “to reign” is to serve! Her service is “to reign”!

Not Michelangelo Code at all. JPII From the Vatican, 29 June 1995, the Solemnity of Saints Peter and Paul.

 

[Brendan]

they’d only be in a state of mortal sin if they knew it was wrong. Not everyone is raised with the idea that they are supossed to be married before they can have sex. Especially in our society today

Every person is given an innate sense of right and wrong, so the only ones who could make a claim that they did not understand are those with an impediment to reason, such as the mentally handicapped.

 

[Rach620]

LETTER OF POPE JOHN PAUL II
TO WOMEN

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_let_29061995_women_en.html

The Church sees in Mary the highest expression of the “feminine genius” and she finds in her a source of constant inspiration.

You beat me to it!

At any rate, *Mulieris Dignitatem *is a magnificent letter of JPII’s–highly recommended that all read it!

 

[rpp]

Both the man and the woman are culpable for their own sin. In addition, they are culpable for leading another person into grave sin. That means they are each culpable for their own and the other person’s sin. After, if either one suddenly jumped up and said “No!” things would not have progressed any farther.

If a person leads another into grave (mortal) sin, they are culpable for that sin as well, whether they participated in it or not.

An example of this is Porn. All those involved in the production and distribution of pornography are responsible for the sin that every person who sees or uses that product is induced to commit because of it. So if a person after viewing porn is induced to commit fornication, or even rape, then the porn producer is also responsible, even if that responsibility is physically remote.

Degree of culbability varies depending on the many factors, such as age, mental impariment, consious rejection of moral codes, be they revealed or natural law, etc.

Our sin has consequences we may not know about until the Judgment.

 

[asquared]

When a woman and a man engage in intercourse outside of marriage, who is the victim and who is the abuser?

assuming both are willing participants both sin against each other and against themselves. that is why sexual sin is so damaging because it harms the self as well as the other. one is also sinning against one’s spouse or future possible spouse by sexual sin.

the case of the man tempted by the vixen, what do you think? everyone who sins responds to a temptation. the person offering the temptation may be guilty as well, but that does not mitigate the guilt of the other party.

 

[LovedForever]

assuming both are willing participants both sin against each other and against themselves. that is why sexual sin is so damaging because it harms the self as well as the other. one is also sinning against one’s spouse or future possible spouse by sexual sin.
QUOTE]

You are right on. Even after many years of marriage - it STILL hurts that my spouse was intimate with others before me. My spouse has been my “only” one. It causes all kinds of mental and emotional issues that takes prayer and patience to work through. But - it never really ever goes completely AWAY.

A word of caution to those who think that premarital sex involves just the “two” of you. WRONG!

 

[countertenor]

Every person is given an innate sense of right and wrong, so the only ones who could make a claim that they did not understand are those with an impediment to reason, such as the mentally handicapped.

An inate sense of right and wrong, yes but sex outside of marraige isn’t something you can just assume to put into that category. Random sex, maybe, but many people are growing up being told it’s totally fine and normal to have sex with their boyfriend or girlfriend whether they’re married or not. And their senses of right and wrong tell them that’s okay because that’s what they’ve always known.

In all honesty I went to Catholic School and never even learnt that homosexuallity was not okay until I started studying it on my own and it was just not something I ever even thought about. Nor did it even dawn on me that it wasn’t okay when I knew gay people. I knew they weren’t normal but I didn’t know it was wrong. You can’t judge other people based on yourself and you should claim that only people with a mental handicap would be able to tell right from wrong, because then you’re just insulting people.

 

[countertenor]

asquared;1795813:

assuming both are willing participants both sin against each other and against themselves. that is why sexual sin is so damaging because it harms the self as well as the other. one is also sinning against one’s spouse or future possible spouse by sexual sin.
QUOTE]

You are right on. Even after many years of marriage - it STILL hurts that my spouse was intimate with others before me. My spouse has been my “only” one. It causes all kinds of mental and emotional issues that takes prayer and patience to work through. But - it never really ever goes completely AWAY.

A word of caution to those who think that premarital sex involves just the “two” of you. WRONG!

That’s totally true. Many people think that and that is wrong. I think the other thing though is that too many people just don’t think about it. They just do it.