The Catholic teachings on passions is in contradiction

S

Stepinac

New member
It says that passions (including arousal) are „christian patrimony“ (CCC 1763) and „natural components of the human psyche“ (CCC 1764) and they are neutral until they engange in some act (CCC 1767-177), but if you feel arousal upon a woman, then you're blame for lust (2514-2533; Matthew 5:27-28) even if you don't want to commit adultery (I don’t know how am I supposed to commit adultery if I don’t have a wife), or any other sexual sin which is an analogy *in malam partem*, and we gotta refuse all those feelings to be pure (CCC 2520).
Christians traditionally distinguish the difference between „attraction“ and „lust/arousal“. As well as I understand it, the differences are in intense: „attraction“ is less intensive, while „lust“ is high intensive. That’s like you say “feeling less angry is OK, but even if you feel intensively angry, than you’re blame” even if the Church says that anger is a desire for revenge. (CCC 2302).
Because of that, I anxiously worry that my attraction will escalate into lust. The life would be much easy if I could say “I don’t care if I feel aroused by a sexy woman – my feelings (including consent on my feeling) are just feelings – they doesn’t mean I want to use her as an object nor I want to commit adultery or any other sexual sin. No one is wounded.” Other christians and I wouldn’t suffer from OCD. I can't imagine the whole life in which I gotta be hyperviglian about my intensity of my feelings.
It would makes sense if lust is defined as a desire for committing adultery as well as anger is defined, not as feeling, but a desire for revenge.
 
Stepinac said:
It says that passions (including arousal) are „christian patrimony“ (CCC 1763) and „natural components of the human psyche“ (CCC 1764) and they are neutral until they engange in some act (CCC 1767-177), but if you feel arousal upon a woman, then you're blame for lust (2514-2533; Matthew 5:27-28) even if you don't want to commit adultery (I don’t know how am I supposed to commit adultery if I don’t have a wife), or any other sexual sin which is an analogy *in malam partem*, and we gotta refuse all those feelings to be pure (CCC 2520).
Christians traditionally distinguish the difference between „attraction“ and „lust/arousal“. As well as I understand it, the differences are in intense: „attraction“ is less intensive, while „lust“ is high intensive. That’s like you say “feeling less angry is OK, but even if you feel intensively angry, than you’re blame” even if the Church says that anger is a desire for revenge. (CCC 2302).
Because of that, I anxiously worry that my attraction will escalate into lust. The life would be much easy if I could say “I don’t care if I feel aroused by a sexy woman – my feelings (including consent on my feeling) are just feelings – they doesn’t mean I want to use her as an object nor I want to commit adultery or any other sexual sin. No one is wounded.” Other christians and I wouldn’t suffer from OCD. I can't imagine the whole life in which I gotta be hyperviglian about my intensity of my feelings.
It would makes sense if lust is defined as a desire for committing adultery as well as anger is defined, not as feeling, but a desire for revenge.
Click to expand...
You cannot help what you spontaneously feel, but once you become aware of these feelings, how you respond to them is where the sin lies. A temptation is not a sin. There is no need to be hypervigilant, as you put it, just divert your attentions when such feelings arise, and try to channel them elsewhere, into a positive direction. Incidentally, a single man could commit adultery by sinning with a married woman, but "adultery" in this case can extend to fornication between two single people. The sixth and ninth commandments cover all sexual sin.

Your concern seems to be more with how various words are defined, and what they mean, as well as how to respond to spontaneous feelings that involve no act of the will. I'd recommend that you consult a priest and tell him exactly what you have discussed here.
 
HomeschoolDad said:
You cannot help what you spontaneously feel, but once you become aware of these feelings, how you respond to them is where the sin lies. A temptation is not a sin. There is no need to be hypervigilant, as you put it, just divert your attentions when such feelings arise, and try to channel them elsewhere, into a positive direction. Incidentally, a single man could commit adultery by sinning with a married woman, but "adultery" in this case can extend to fornication between two single people. The sixth and ninth commandments cover all sexual sin.

Your concern seems to be more with how various words are defined, and what they mean, as well as how to respond to spontaneous feelings that involve no act of the will. I'd recommend that you consult a priest and tell him exactly what you have discussed here.
Click to expand...
It's impossible to say "the emotion is good, but run away from it like plage (in a positive way)". There are two options: either the attraction is sinful (lust) or not. If it's good, it can't be sinful harboring it. If it's harboring attraction is sinful, than tolerating at first glance should be sinful as well.
Welcome in Apsurdistan where you're adulter if your feeling consider normal
 
In other words, you can't stop the birds from flying over your head, but you can stop them from building a nest in your hair.

Dxx
 
DaveBj said:
In other words, you can't stop the birds from flying over your head, but you can stop them from building a nest in your hair.

Dxx
Click to expand...
You go out of the topic: the topic isn't "how to deal with temptations", but rather "what is considered a sin or not: specifically contradictions in catholic statements on passions and lust"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top