FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: 6th commandment
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4
(08-12-2011, 12:18 PM)piabee Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-12-2011, 11:06 AM)a83192 Wrote: [ -> ]He has no desire to do sex with her but he looks at her to enjoy the good feeling.

If he keeps looking instead of turning away I think he is entering dangerous territory.

The key to sin is the will.  Choosing to keep looking would make this at least a venial sin.

As to the physiology of it all: moving your neck or using extraocular muscles to look at a chosen object in one's field of view is under the control of the voluntary nervous system, generally.

Getting an erection is under the autonomic (involuntary, generally) nervous system.  You control it indirectly (by choosing what to think about or look at) but not directly.

I was told by a traditionalist priest in confession, that if you harbor an impure though for 6 seconds or more it becomes grave.

I have no idea where Fr came up with this number, but that is what he told me.
It seems rather arbitrary, the 6 seconds that is....
(08-12-2011, 02:33 PM)dan hunter Wrote: [ -> ]I was told by a traditionalist priest in confession, that if you harbor an impure though for 6 seconds or more it becomes grave.

I have no idea where Fr came up with this number, but that is what he told me.
It seems rather arbitrary, the 6 seconds that is....

Maybe because it is the 6th Commandment? I don't know where he got that number from either, unless a Saint got a vision from our Lord saying that after 6 seconds it became a mortal sin!

You know, perhaps we should all just blindfold our eyes as to not fall into serious sin any longer!
(08-12-2011, 02:37 PM)crusaderfortruth3372 Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-12-2011, 02:33 PM)dan hunter Wrote: [ -> ]I was told by a traditionalist priest in confession, that if you harbor an impure though for 6 seconds or more it becomes grave.

I have no idea where Fr came up with this number, but that is what he told me.
It seems rather arbitrary, the 6 seconds that is....

Maybe because it is the 6th Commandment? I don't know where he got that number from either, unless a Saint got a vision from our Lord saying that after 6 seconds it became a mortal sin!

You know, perhaps we should all just blindfold our eyes as to not fall into serious sin any longer!
You are right, and the internat is a big problem.
I can be looking for something Catholic or seemingly innocuous of a secular nature and up pops a scantily clad girl.

(08-12-2011, 02:37 PM)crusaderfortruth3372 Wrote: [ -> ]"But again, as to the pleasure which may be taken in temptation (technically called delectation), inasmuch as our souls have two parts, one inferior, the other superior, and the inferior does not always choose to be led by the superior, but 299 takes its own line,—it not unfrequently happens that the inferior part takes pleasure in a temptation not only without consent from, but absolutely in contradiction to the superior will. It is this contest which S. Paul describes when he speaks of the “law in my members, warring against the law of my mind"
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/desales/devout_...i.iii.html

From  "Introduction to the Devout Life"... I think St. Francis implies that you can have pleasure without consent, but I'm not 100% sure as I have a bit  of a problem understanding that passage fully.

(08-12-2011, 02:59 PM)crusaderfortruth3372 Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-12-2011, 02:37 PM)crusaderfortruth3372 Wrote: [ -> ]"But again, as to the pleasure which may be taken in temptation (technically called delectation), inasmuch as our souls have two parts, one inferior, the other superior, and the inferior does not always choose to be led by the superior, but 299 takes its own line,—it not unfrequently happens that the inferior part takes pleasure in a temptation not only without consent from, but absolutely in contradiction to the superior will. It is this contest which S. Paul describes when he speaks of the “law in my members, warring against the law of my mind"
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/desales/devout_...i.iii.html

From  "Introduction to the Devout Life"... I think St. Francis implies that you can have pleasure without consent, but I'm not 100% sure as I have a bit  of a problem understanding that passage fully.
This is a great quote....thank you. It is as simple as this...YOU are not your thoughts. Your brain is not your soul.
This is a phony poster, he was worrying about semen on his underwear that Dad was mad at, now he talks about  having a boner . He is just playing games with us. Rolling eyes Rolling eyes Rolling eyes
Tommorrow he'll be telling us  he wants to be a porn star and wants to know if its a mortal sin if he's only play acting  :o :o :o :o :o :o :o
Boner isn't slang for turned on because turned on is also slang.  Aroused is a better and more objective word.

I find it hard to believe that the woman was not an object of lust.  Let's consider the facts:

Boy sees girl.
Boy gets aroused.
Boy continues to look at girl because he likes "the feeling."

What's the feeling?  There's nothing wrong with looking at a good looking girl.  Admiring beauty is certainly within the confines of appropriateness.  But the causailty here suggests that lust is involved.  There's nothing wrong with being aroused, it's anatomy.  The way things work.  But if one is getting aroused because of what they're looking at it means that if they're not lusting, they are in danger of it.  So to continue to look because of "the feeling" sounds like lust to me.
And if he's serious Salus?  He's been here for a while, I dont' think he's phony.
Pages: 1 2 3 4