Viagra/cialis has nothing to do with testosterone .PV - I believe a married man, committed to his wife, may use this med to his and her benefit.
I didn’t say what it was. I said, “I believe a married man, committed to his wife, may use this med to his and her benefit.”Viagra/cialis has nothing to do with testosterone .
It has to do with blood flow and vasodilation. In some men the blood flow is constricted and they csnt get erect. These drugs dialate the blood vessels so that blood can enter and cause erection.
The burden is on you.A light moderate sexual desire.
I agree, I guess my response was to PV. He talked about testosterone and not getting why a catholic would want to use it.I didn’t say what it was. I said, “I believe a married man, committed to his wife, may use this med to his and her benefit.”
Such is NOT the Theological definition of the sin of lust. Secular dictionaries are not necessarily always helpful in doing Theology.Let’s review the definition of lust;
very strong sexual desire.
“he knew that his lust for her had returned”
synonyms: sexual desire, sexual appetite, sexual longing, ardor, desire, passion; More
a passionate desire for something.
“a lust for power”
.
Lust is not about strong or weak sexual desire.The burden is on you.
I stated / asked: The definition you show claims that lust is of very strong sexual desire … as opposed to light-moderate sexual desire. Do they not count as lust?
Are you saying that Lust must be of "very strong sexual desire? — Is all lust very strong sexual desire or can it occur in less or even at a “most” powerful level?
“Inordinate enjoyment” is the same as “very strong”. Note it does not say, “Lust is the disordered desire of being attracted to a woman”.Such is NOT the Theological definition of the sin of lust. Secular dictionaries are not necessarily always helpful in doing Theology.
Lust is not about strong or weak sexual desire.
Lust does not need to be “strong” desire to be lust.
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.
scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c2a6.htm#2351
No it is not. Inordinate enjoyment can be quite “weak” and still be inordinate. Still be lust. Your still using the secular dictionary. You have to set that completely aside.“Inordinate enjoyment” is the same as “very strong”.
Attraction is not the same as lust. Correct. But of course lust can happen as well.Note it does not say, “Lust is the disordered desire of being attracted to a woman”.
No. But lust can enter in - as Jesus teaches.It does not say, “Lust is the disordered desire of noticing a woman’s beauty”
Yes lust can be an engagements of thoughts. But lust need not involve thoughts.These are both natural God given parts of our sexuality.
It goes on to talk about sexual desire outside it’s “unitive and procreative purposes”. This indicates a sexual desire far greater than noticing an attractive woman.
Again, Lust is engagement of thoughts that lead to some form of sexual gratification.
Correct.So example,
You are walking in the mall, you see a woman with a revealing dress, you think, “wow she’s beautiful” that is not lust…
You see the same woman and start thinking of how you would have sex with her and “undress her in your mind” that is lust.
Yes but that wasn’t my point.PV - I believe a married man, committed to his wife, may use this med to his and her benefit.
I don’t believe Jesus would have looked a second time. The idea that you are thinking about it, in my opinion, is good. We overcome these tiny sins by confessing and/or practicing our Faith in Christ.Hi, I know I should be taking this to my confessor, but I am fretting about it and cannot at this hour. Anyways, I was watching a movie (Blind Side) with my fam. I was looking at my computer, and then I looked up and noticed the actress (Sandra B) was wearing a lowcut dress while posing for a family photo. I looked down because I knew it was not good that I stare, but then I looked again (I guess for a quick look to confirm what my eyes though they say?) and then instantly felt guilty.
I am not really scrupulous other than sins dealing with sexuality and lust. Does this sound like a grave sin? Not so bad? Lust? I didn’t develop any thoughts, just observed what was on the screen.
Please let me know, and I apologize but this was kind of urgent. Thanks.