Is this is a sin in the eyes of Jesus our saviour?
On Looking at Girls
By Jimmy Akin
jimmyakin.org/2009/01/appreciating-beauty-vs-concupiscence.html
A reader writes:
This is regarding “looking at girls”.
I am very clear that obviously pornography is a grave matter. I also am clear that deliberately engaging in lustful thoughts, lustful desires, or trying to arouse yourself (outside marriage) with full knowledge and full consent is also mortal sin. Of course thoughts without these aspects are either venial or not a sin.
What I still struggle with is the question of “deliberately looking at an attractive or shapely girl”. And liking to do so.
I had understood that one could deliberately look at an attractive girl and admire her beauty -even the beauty of her form- and that the pleasure one finds in seeing her beauty and shape was not sinful to consent to and one could just ignore any “reactions of concupiscence” that happen.
Of course one must take care …and know yourself …as well as at times use custody of the eyes --particularly if she is very immodestly dressed.
Also that one could even look at a work of art that is nude etc (that is not lustfully done --that shows the dignity of the person) and admire the form and beauty and ignore any “reactions of concupiscence”.
Is this treating a girl as an object? Am I wrong in doing this? Is it sinful?
In this context, treating someone “as an object” mean improperly treating a person as an instrument of sexual gratification and thus not properly recognizing the dignity of the person. There are also other ways one can (non-sexually) “object”-ify a person, e.g., treating a spouse as merely a means of getting certain tasks done (breadwinning, household management, whatever). In general, treating someone merely as a means to an end and not respecting the fundamental dignity of the person results in the objectification of that person. Sexual objectification is just one species in a larger genus.
But you know what
doesn’t belong to this genus? Recognizing a person’s good points.
If someone is beautiful or handsome or smart or prudent or a good breadwinner or a good household manager or a good square dance caller or has any other good points, it’s *fine *to recognize and appreciate those facts. If they are manifest, it would even be contrary to reason not to do so. So recognizing and appreciating the beauty of the human form–in general or in a specific case–is not a sin.
At least you couldn’t guess it from the statues and paintings that the folks at the Vatican have all over the place. They sure seem to be on board with this idea. I mean, just look at the Sistine Chapel! Just look at
the Last Judgment! And this is where they elect popes!
So it seems to me that one is on pretty safe ground saying that it’s okay and not-automatically-objectifying if you recognize and appreciate physical beauty or any other good attribute that a person has.
It
becomes objectifying if you reduce the person’s worth to just their good or useful qualities. Of course, in the area of appreciating physical beauty–especially of the opposite sex–we have to be careful.
It’s one thing to be looking at a marble statue of a nude woman.
It’s another to be looking at a color photograph of a nude woman.
It’s another yet to be looking at a real live nude woman.
These represent different levels of moral risk, and the greater the peril, the more stringent efforts must be taken to avoid it or escape from it. Because people are different and subject to different levels of temptation, they will have to determine based on their own self-knowledge and personal history what situations are too dangerous for them to allow themselves to be in.
(cont.)