Yet another impure thoughts thread

[casslean]

I know, we all love an impure thoughts thread. But I’m making a real effort to develop a stronger conscience, and this is one issue I’ve never been sure about.

When do you consider to cross the line? I’ve heard/read so many different interpretations that I’m really looking for a more principled approach. If the issue is one of lust, for instance, and the concern with lust is that it turns us into sexual beings (thus divorcing sex from its procreative purpose and from marriage) then would imagining one’s wedding night, for instance, be an “impure thought”? Is it a matter of how graphic or detailed one allows those thoughts to become?

This is just an example of how I’m looking to unpack the principles behind the answer so I can understand how you reason through your thinking.

Is it a mortal or a venial sin? Is it one of those things where it is ordinarily mortal, but not knowing it is mortal would vitiate culpability?

 

[1Lord1Faith]

This is just an example of how I’m looking to unpack the principles behind the answer so I can understand how you reason through your thinking.

Don’t worry about it unless it becomes animalistic, primitive, malicious, or it interferes with your life or someone else’s life.

The principal(s) I used here for lust wouldn’t be any different for anger.

 

[drac16]

On the subject of marriage, I would say that if you aren’t married to a woman, it’s sinful to lust after her. Until you marry her, do not have a sexual fantasy about her. Once you’re married, you can feel free to enjoy her. I think that lust has to be done with intention in order for it to be a sin. If you’re on a friend’s computer and all of a sudden a pornographic pop-up comes up, God willing, you will not be held accountable for that. If however, you go to a pornographic website and look at stuff, that is definitely a sin.

 

[Kei]

What do you mean by imagining the wedding night? The celebration? The getting married? Or do you mean consummation? I would say it is safer to not dwell on the consummation.

 

[Arwing]

I would think lust as in engaging in a sexual desire would definitely be a mortal sin, if the thoughts are deliberately willed or entertained. Same would apply if sexual pleasure is willed or consented to.

Thoughts which aren’t lustful, objectifying or aimed at pleasure might not be sinful or necessarilly impure, it depends on the intent and would also depend on your reaction to the thoughts, or whether they lead to temptation, etc. Imagining sexual acts seems like something to be avoided especially because of the tendency for such a thing to cause temptation and that, I would think, it’s practically always attached to lust. (Of course especially for those who are married, I would think the willing of any kind of thoughts of intimacy with someone other than one’s spouse would be gravely sinful.)

Passing thoughts that aren’t entertained or consented to probably aren’t to be worried about, when there’s temptation it’s best to try to ignore it (by thinking about something else).

Not being aware something is a grave sin generally will lessen culpability. Some things are rather obviously serious, but I can’t say in which cases this would apply (something like murder pretty much everyone would be aware is serious even if they don’t know about mortal sins, so for example it probably wouldn’t apply there).

 

[TheOldColonel]

As long as your thoughts don’t become corrupt, debased, debauched, decadent, degenerate, degraded, demoralized, depraved, dissipated, dissolute, libertine, loose, perverse, perverted, rakish, sick, unclean, unwholesome, or warped, you have nothing to worry about. So relax.

 

[QwertyGirl]

We are created the way we are for a purpose. That includes sexual desire. I wouldn’t worry about any of this unless your thoughts are obsessive, keeping you from living a full and well rounded life.

 

[Arwing]

If the issue is one of lust, for instance, and the concern with lust is that it turns us into sexual beings (thus divorcing sex from its procreative purpose and from marriage) then would imagining one’s wedding night, for instance, be an “impure thought”?

I agree with what Kei said on this, also if you mean whether sexual thoughts involving an imaginary marriage makes it OK, then no, it’s still impure. Deliberate sexual desire for anyone you’re not currently married to is gravely sinful and even then there can still be lust.

 

[crenfro]

Hello.

I think if you surf around on the whole Catholic Answers web site you’ll find a big section devoted only to chastity. May be worth investigating.

You’re in my prayers. Please pray for me.

 

[Arwing]

Don’t worry about it unless it becomes animalistic, primitive, malicious, or it interferes with your life or someone else’s life.

The principal(s) I used here for lust wouldn’t be any different for anger.

I’m not sure which principles exactly should be used for anger, but the deliberately willed or indulged desire to do something evil as far as I know contracts the same evil (i.e. Matthew 5:28 “every one who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart”).

Catholic Encyclopedia on lust:

The wrongfulness of lust is reducible to this: that venereal satisfaction is sought for either outside wedlock or, at any rate, in a manner which is contrary to the laws that govern marital intercourse. Every such criminal indulgence is a mortal sin, provided of course, it be voluntary in itself and fully deliberate.

Transgressions against the virtues other than purity frequently admit of a minor degree of malice, and are accounted venial. Impurity has the evil distinction that, whenever there is a direct conscious surrender to any of its phases the guilt incurred is always grievous.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09438a.htm

 

[casslean]

Transgressions against the virtues other than purity frequently admit of a minor degree of malice, and are accounted venial. Impurity has the evil distinction that, whenever there is a direct conscious surrender to any of its phases the guilt incurred is always grievous.

So, here’s the thing - the article does a good job of explaining lust, and talking about how acts of lust might be committed, but is less good at talking about purity as a principle. If purity is a virtue, what does it mean to be impure, and thus, how do we determine what an “impure” thought is?

 

[1Lord1Faith]

I don’t find the Catholic Encyclopedia to be a good source for very much, especially this subject. That article wasn’t very good for generalities let alone the OP’s question.

The part you’re quoting from Mt doesn’t apply to the OP. Mt is referring to someone who is actively trying to commit adultery.

 

[Arwing]

Well regarding Mt 5:28, I would say “willing/committing to the desire” rather than necessarily “trying,” but I do see the point there.

OP I think I see what you’re getting at now. In terms of principles surely we can say a thought ordered towards an evil desire or towards sexual pleasure (or a thought that leads one to consent to such pleasure) would be gravely immoral. But is there certain content to thoughts that makes them immoral in themselves, even if they’re divorced from the two aforementioned motivators, and the illicit context (outside marriage) is removed?

It seems obviously wrong to say there’s an inherent problem with wanting to have licit marital relations, since that’s a good thing, but is dwelling on that or actually visualizing them also moral? Again here I feel it’s probably something to avoid because of the close connection with temptation, that I’d imagine it’s very often motivated by pleasure, and that it’s objectifying the person involved. And I can’t imagine the reason for doing so, particularly in detail, would be a very good one especially given the risks (i.e. desire for gratification).

Perhaps asking a priest or someone more qualified for a clearer answer on this would be best.

 

[BoyGenius]

then would imagining one’s wedding night, for instance, be an “impure thought”?

“The two will become one flesh.”
“What God has put together, let no man put asunder.”

Those two key quotes from Scripture seem to me directed towards what you are thinking, and asking questions about.

But what does your thinking of a “wedding night” suggest? Do you stir the passions in your body, mind, and heart altogether?

Here’s the way I look at it, The time of your wedding is when you become united, man and woman, in one body. That consummation, which is a gift unto you and your spouse in marriage. Which bears and greets the gift of life. Thus, no longer two in that union, but a third - another. And of course an enumeration of other persons which extend and grow from that relationship as well.

Since you will not know your child until he or she is born. Likewise, as you are not yet in the state of Holy Matrimony, in one flesh with your spouse to be. I’d say you really couldn’t imagine the deep characteristics in that union as one body.

The pro-creative genius of the body, to bring forward life into the world, is a gift to be given. Suppose we use the analogy of say when a man buys this girl a ring, to propose to her. Now, he could spend all his dwelling on imaging her re-action, and how she would feel about him asking about marrying him. But, like buying a gift, no one ever knows exactly the re-action they will get when giving the gift to another.

The act of matrimony is a gift. You and your spouse will not know until your wedding night. Because, like any gift, the surprise and expectation, the joy on someone’s face, is a priceless gem and treasure.

Happy Lent as we approach Easter.

 

[casslean]

It seems obviously wrong to say there’s an inherent problem with wanting to have licit marital relations, since that’s a good thing, but is dwelling on that or actually visualizing them also moral? Again here I feel it’s probably something to avoid because of the close connection with temptation, that I’d imagine it’s very often motivated by pleasure, and that it’s objectifying the person involved. And I can’t imagine the reason for doing so, particularly in detail, would be a very good one especially given the risks (i.e. desire for gratification).

This is a litle more helpful in terms of what I was looking for. I’m putting this forward really more as a thought exercise than seeking an answer, because I’m trying to understand moral theology better, and this seemed to me one area where we tend to want to default to black and white answers rather than parsing principles and working through the why behind those answers. So much of our life is gray areas - not a black and white of yes and no - that I think understanding the principles makes it much easier to not only choose the right path but also defend the church teachings to others.