Double effect and sexual excitement

[chain]

I was wondering about thoughts on how double effect plays with sexuality. In specific, I was involved in a discussion - and I think double effect might be relative. There might also be a bit of scrupulosity happening as well.

The individual found that on several occasions a specific exercise routine left them excited (most likely due to increased oxygen and circulation caused by the exercise). They did not do that specific routine to become excited, but they recognize that the excitement could easily lead to sin.

I think exercise can be intrinsically good, and these specific exercises are very beneficial. Are the exercises now a near occasion of sin to always be avoided - or can they still be done if the occasion of sin can be controlled in another manner (either when they are highly unlikely to be excited, or when that excitement can be validly channeled into their marriage).

---

I also can imagine quite a few other things that are not intrinsically evil (but not necessarily intrinsically good either - like a perfume) that could cause excitement - if the excitement can be avoided, controlled, or channeled - would those things still be near occasions of sin?

 

[Inwe86]

I believe the Church teaches that if an act causes unintentional arousal, the act isn’t a sin. But in this case, it may be at the most an occasion of sin since you said it causes the person in question to sin. In that case, maybe this particular exercise could be avoided and substituted with another less-arousing exercise? Perhaps it isn’t the increased circulation and oxygen, but some physical movement within the exercise that’s causing unintentional stimulation.

 

[Inwe86]

I also can imagine quite a few other things that are not intrinsically evil (but not necessarily intrinsically good either - like a perfume) that could cause excitement - if the excitement can be avoided, controlled, or channeled - would those things still be near occasions of sin?

It sounds like you’re referring to sexual fetishes. I don’t think a sexual fetish is a sin, but care must be taken so that it doesn’t lead to sin. Some occasions of sin just can’t be avoided.

 

[FiberZilla]

The topic is a breeding ground for scrupulosity. Many people who suffer from this actually wind up in a highly weakened state and find themselves engaging in masturbation not to fulfill a lustful fantasy, but to relieve anxiety and stress generated by irrational fear and unwarranted guilt.

After the masturbation, the real guilt sets in. That’s why this stuff can be so tricky to overcome. But I would say that avoiding “triggers”, or anything that has a history of leading you to actually* carry out *acts of sexual impurity is simply using good judgement.

 

[Sophia86]

You’re being too hard on yourself. If it has been unintentional as you have outlined, then you simply are not to blame. Perhaps try a different exercise as priorly suggested in a different post. If that fails, then stop feeling so guilty about it! If you have not done anything wrong, then let it go, and once it is off your mind you won’t obsess over it and subsequently feel compelled to do it.

You need to relax, stop punishing yourself, and stop worrying. That is the real problem here. It is more in your mind than anything else.

I hope you feel less stressed soon

 

[Karmartia]

I think exercise can be intrinsically good, and these specific exercises are very beneficial. Are the exercises now a near occasion of sin to always be avoided - or can they still be done if the occasion of sin can be controlled in another manner (either when they are highly unlikely to be excited, or when that excitement can be validly channeled into their marriage).

---

I also can imagine quite a few other things that are not intrinsically evil (but not necessarily intrinsically good either - like a perfume) that could cause excitement - if the excitement can be avoided, controlled, or channeled - would those things still be near occasions of sin?

Tough question. I know that on the days when my wife does her Pilates she’s more amorous than usual, and I thank God for Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. I always thought she just felt more attractive after working out, but now I see that it might be something else entirely.

Seriously, though, I think the anwer to your question might be that anything can be a near occasion of sin, depending on your state of mind at the time. The onus is on you to overcome temptation and to channel the urge into something holy.

 

[BrokenRoad]

Actually, for me, exercises lessens sexual cravings. It’s actually my main way of combating personal impurity

 

[Cashue]

I was wondering about thoughts on how double effect plays with sexuality. In specific, I was involved in a discussion - and I think double effect might be relative. There might also be a bit of scrupulosity happening as well.

The individual found that on several occasions a specific exercise routine left them excited (most likely due to increased oxygen and circulation caused by the exercise). They did not do that specific routine to become excited, but they recognize that the excitement could easily lead to sin.

I think exercise can be intrinsically good, and these specific exercises are very beneficial. Are the exercises now a near occasion of sin to always be avoided - or can they still be done if the occasion of sin can be controlled in another manner (either when they are highly unlikely to be excited, or when that excitement can be validly channeled into their marriage).

Exercises that stimulate the sexual organs should be avoided as it can lead to masturbation or sexual immorality.

---

I also can imagine quite a few other things that are not intrinsically evil (but not necessarily intrinsically good either - like a perfume) that could cause excitement - if the excitement can be avoided, controlled, or channeled - would those things still be near occasions of sin?