S
Seeking_More
Guest
nevermind
- Status
E
EasterJoy
Guest
As far as I know, the Church considers all revelations regarding specific souls in Purgatory and their punishments to be private revelations, and not belonging to the deposit of faith which Catholics are bound to believe.
Having said that, the Church does teach that we are culpable when our actions present a temptation (or near occasion of sin) to others. Whether they use their free will to fall into sin is on their heads, but the guilt for presenting the temptation to them in the first place is on ours. You are not culpable if someone finds your work an occasion of sin in ways that you could not reasonably have foreseen. For instance, if a man finds that red apples make him think of some particular woman that he covets or lusts over, you’d have no way of knowing that. If he fell into sin because of artwork you had drawn, you would not be punished for the innocent act of representing red apples in your art.
Also, as you say, the sin of David with Bathsheba, if depicted in art, could give someone else the idea to deal with the husband of a woman they wanted to marry in a similar way. Obviously, the depiction of sin is not a temptation to sin, per se. If it were, the Bible itself would be a temptation to sin. Rather, the litmus test is whether or not the sin is presented in art in such a way that the art lends glamour to sin or normalizes sin. That is what you want to avoid.
Having said that, the Church does teach that we are culpable when our actions present a temptation (or near occasion of sin) to others. Whether they use their free will to fall into sin is on their heads, but the guilt for presenting the temptation to them in the first place is on ours. You are not culpable if someone finds your work an occasion of sin in ways that you could not reasonably have foreseen. For instance, if a man finds that red apples make him think of some particular woman that he covets or lusts over, you’d have no way of knowing that. If he fell into sin because of artwork you had drawn, you would not be punished for the innocent act of representing red apples in your art.
Also, as you say, the sin of David with Bathsheba, if depicted in art, could give someone else the idea to deal with the husband of a woman they wanted to marry in a similar way. Obviously, the depiction of sin is not a temptation to sin, per se. If it were, the Bible itself would be a temptation to sin. Rather, the litmus test is whether or not the sin is presented in art in such a way that the art lends glamour to sin or normalizes sin. That is what you want to avoid.
Z
Zundrah
Guest
F
followingtheway
Guest
Z
Zundrah
Guest
F
followingtheway
Guest
Why, thank you :compcoff:Never mind, let’s just have some tea.
S
SummerSmiles
Guest
The OP originally posted a detailed question, to which EasterJoy responded. After she posted her response, the OP went back and edited the post… so that’s why it looks confusing now.Huh?
Huh?
Exactly
A
ack
Guest
Glad to know that the question was answered, and the original post wasn’t the product of a tongue-tied Nirvana fan…
- Status