Is he guilty of lust?

[CHRISTINE77]

This isn’t about a man desiring relations with “a woman”. In this scenario, a young man is about to consummate his marriage to the love of his life.
On top of that, he has managed to keep his lustful urges in check up until this moment. That is a whole lot of pressure. He has done everything right.
We were given sexual urges so that we would want to procreate. His high level of desire is normal and natural.

I’d worry about him if he didn’t have that reaction to her!

 

[happymommy]

I’d worry about him if he didn’t have that reaction to her!

great minds think alike:thumbsup:

 

[thistle]

Give me a break. If two people aren’t aroused before they have sex, than it isn’t going to happen. There’s a difference between being aroused with your spouse or treating her only as a sexual object.

Oops! I misread the OP. I thought he was talking about the night before they got married.
My comments therefore relate only to someone who is not married.

 

[Lee_M]

Oops! I misread the OP. I thought he was talking about the night before they got married.
My comments therefore relate only to someone who is not married.

I understand. That would make a difference.

 

[fbl9]

The moment he voluntarily shifts his focus from his bride to himself, his desire for carnal pleasure has exceeded a reasonable limit.

As far as him knowing it, that depends on what he’s been taught.

Finally some one has answered the question posted…and in a way that no one can really distort.

 

[Brickmaker]

If this is a topic of concern that TLM08 has, I don’t see what any of business it is of yours. You’ve posted twice on this thread and both times it seems to be an attack on TLM08. I understand you’re new here, but this against forum rules. You haven’t added one comment that even relates to this thread. Again you should not just post to a thread to attack a person’s character. Shame on you.

If he posts on a public forum of which I’m a member (albeit a newbie) then it’s as much my business as it is yours.

I did not ‘attack’ him - I commented on something I had observed about the subject of his posts while browsing the PUBLIC forums. That’s against the rules? The OP didn’t seem to have a problem with it and responded in a bantering tone - at least that’s what I took from his use of emoticons. If he did experience it as an attack, then I apologize.

And ‘shame on you’ is not an attack on my character??

As another poster has observed, the pre-occupation with sex and the finer details of its potential sinfulness on these forums - and the Moral Theology one, in particular - is, to say the least, odd. Concerning yourselves over whether or not an imaginary young, virgin male (or female) might experience lust on his/her wedding night is beyond ‘odd’.

 

[TLM08]

Clearly this definition of lust is incomplete in reference to God’s purpose for our life.

God designed men and women to be attracted to each other. If He hadn’t, our human race would have died out a LONG time ago. Additionally, He created us to desire each other physically. We are MADE that way.

The problem comes when that desire and any ensuing actions exist outside of God’s purpose, which in this case is marriage.

Lust, even by this definition is not a sin. It’s the thoughts and actions that occur because of the lust that are sin. Lust is a feeling. How you feel is not the sin…it’s what you do with that feeling that is the sin.

In this scenario, this man is “lusting” after his wife. Despite his lustful feelings, which no doubt occured for his wife prior to their marriage also, he did not act on those feelings. Therefore he committed no sin.
In your example, you do not mention weather or not he had impure thoughts so I’m assuming that he didn’t.

God has created us with the ability to feel many different kinds of emotions. We are made that way for His purpose. How we act on those feelings is our choice. Any action that is contrary to the nature of God and His purpose for our lives would be the sin to be worried about.

As I said in the original scenario, the young man is “soaking in her physical beauty…” Keeping it polite, it’s a way of saying that his eyes take in her entire body, head to toe, and experiencing extreme levels of arousal from seeing her in the lingerie and anticipating having sex with this beautiful girl whom he just got married to. His mind is absolutely racing with sexual thoughts about her.

Is he having impure thoughts? You decide.

Is he enjoying this experience a little too much and therefore committing a sin on his wedding night?

 

[TLM08]

As another poster has observed, the pre-occupation with sex and the finer details of its potential sinfulness on these forums - and the Moral Theology one, in particular - is, to say the least, odd. Concerning yourselves over whether or not an imaginary young, virgin male (or female) might experience lust on his/her wedding night is beyond ‘odd’.

There are many good catholics who are sacred to death to even socialize with the opposite sex because they are afraid of offending God.

The problem is that we live in a sexually saturated world that has taken something good and turned it into something ugly and disgusting.

The moral boundaries can be very hard to discern because of the vast diversity of human sexual behavior and reigious opinion. It’s my hope that these posts will help cut through the fog and help others as well as myself appreciate the gifts that God has given us and use them in the appropriate manner.



I take no offense to your posts on here. Being raised at the height of the sexual revolution in the 60s & 70s, these sexual issues will always be a struggle for me. At least 50% of catholic men admit to struggling with sexual sin. It is often our biggest and toughest challenge. If your struggle is in another area of moraity then let it be known that many of my posts will not be of interest you.

 

[TLM08]

The obsession with sex on these forums is very… odd. But… interesting. I wonder if it extends to the average catholic in the real world, or if it restricted merely to forums like these and the types of people this forum generally presents…

Weekly Mass attendance in the USA is hovering at around 25%

80% of catholic couples of child bearing age are use artificial birth control. A surprising number are “pro-choice”.

50% of catholic men admit to viewing pornography on a semi-regular basis.

It’s probably safe to say that your “average” catholic isn’t overly concerned with these issues… They are doing whatever they want!

 

[mabibleteacher]

As I said in the original scenario, the young man is “soaking in her physical beauty…” Keeping it polite, it’s a way of saying that his eyes take in her entire body, head to toe, and experiencing extreme levels of arousal from seeing her in the lingerie and anticipating having sex with this beautiful girl whom he just got married to. His mind is absolutely racing with sexual thoughts about her.

Is he having impure thoughts? You decide.

Is he enjoying this experience a little too much and therefore committing a sin on his wedding night?

God man sex.Sex within marriage is what God intended. The bible even tells us that within a marriage, the only reason to abstain from sex is if both parties agree for the purpose of prayer and fasting. So clearly God does not have a problem with sex.
Additionally, to insure that spouses enjoy sex, He made it pleasureable. He also made the physical appearance of women pleasurable to men so they would desire women. This is all part of God’s pure purpose for man.
So, is it bad for a husband to sit and oogle his wife and think longingly about making love with her. Absolutely not. Is it wrong for a husband (or a wife for that matter) to enjoy and look forward to sex with their spouse.Absolutely not
Dont’ confuse desire and attraction with lust. Desire and attraction when it is within what God has purposed, is His desire for us.
Desire and attraction outside of God’s purpose for us leads to lust and sin.

 

[mabibleteacher]

I think it would be better to consider the CCC on this rather than the encyclopedia.

CCC 2351 Lust is disordered desire for or inordinate enjoyment of sexual pleasure. Sexual pleasure is morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes.

I think an even better source is the Bible, God’s very word.

Proverbs 5:15, 18-19 reads “Drink waters out of thine own cistern, and running waters out of thine own well…Let thy fountain be blessed and rejoice with the wife of thy youth. Let her be as the loving hind and pleasant roe; let her breasts satisfy thee at all times; and be thou ravished always with her love.”

If God didn’t want us to enjoy sexual relations, He would not have made sex pleasurable. God obviously wants us to enjoy sex. And his Word makes it equally obvious that He only gives sexual relations His blessing when it occurs between a husband and a wife. And, again, the reason for this is because God wants what is best for us.

What a lot of people don’t realize is that sex is not just something that is to be done casually for temporary pleasure. When you are intimate with someone in a sexual way, you are actually becoming one with that person on a deep spiritual level that goes far beyond just temporary thrills.

**Genesis 2:24-25 **shows us this when referring to the first husband and wife, Adam and Eve. It reads, “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.”

When you are intimate with your husband or wife, there is no shame.

 

[Lee_M]

If he posts on a public forum of which I’m a member (albeit a newbie) then it’s as much my business as it is yours.

I did not ‘attack’ him - I commented on something I had observed about the subject of his posts while browsing the PUBLIC forums. That’s against the rules? The OP didn’t seem to have a problem with it and responded in a bantering tone - at least that’s what I took from his use of emoticons. If he did experience it as an attack, then I apologize.

And ‘shame on you’ is not an attack on my character??

As another poster has observed, the pre-occupation with sex and the finer details of its potential sinfulness on these forums - and the Moral Theology one, in particular - is, to say the least, odd. Concerning yourselves over whether or not an imaginary young, virgin male (or female) might experience lust on his/her wedding night is beyond ‘odd’.

I apologize if you wasn’t attacking the OP. A lot of times it is hard to tell the poster’s intent by just reading text but I took it that you was making an attack. Again I apologize if that wasn’t your intent.

As far as it is being odd about the pre-occupation of sex and the sinfulness, I don’t follow you. Lust is one of the seven deadly sins and again it will lead many souls to hell. Why wouldn’t people be concerned about it?

 

[Good_Daughter]

As I said in the original scenario, the young man is “soaking in her physical beauty…” Keeping it polite, it’s a way of saying that his eyes take in her entire body, head to toe, and experiencing extreme levels of arousal from seeing her in the lingerie and anticipating having sex with this beautiful girl whom he just got married to. His mind is absolutely racing with sexual thoughts about her.

Is he having impure thoughts? You decide.

The man’s reaction in your scenario, however extreme, is involuntary. How could it possibly be sinful?

Is he enjoying this experience a little too much and therefore committing a sin on his wedding night?

Inordinate doesn’t only mean excessive, it can also mean disorderly or uncontrolled. Both make more sense in the definitions you used earlier.

Sin can enter only by an act of the will so really, it’s what follows the scenario you’ve presented that determines purity or impurity.

This groom could focus his sexual energy on his bride in an act of sacrificial love, attentive to her every need, trusting she will attend to his. He could also turn his focus inward, seeking his own pleasure.

The second course is where we see the sin of lust because it is clearly an inordinate (disorderly, uncontrolled) indulgence of the carnal pleasure.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

Marriage cannot be consumated without the man getting excited. That’s just how it is. As long as he is passionate about his beloved the man is doing what is right.

It’s wrong when men get excited about other women, (or other beings) and uses pornagraphy to get excited. As long as a man is focused on his wife and feels lust for her that’s fine - that’s how it should be. That’s how babies are made!