|
|
|

Would
I be correct in saying that to look intentionally at
beautiful women who are not one's wife (and you are
married), and even possibly to feel sexual
attraction for them -- that this would not be a sin?
Or that this could be either not a sin or a venial
sin of curiosity or immodest looks depending on
circumstances? In other words, as he goes about the
world, a man sees many attractive girls and often
intentionally looks for a moment and feels the
attraction and enjoys the beauty (but not to lust).
This often would not be any sin but normal. But
sometimes, due to circumstances -- looking too long,
looking too often, or looking at someone who is just
too overpoweringly attractive or is very immodestly
dressed -- it could become a venial sin of immodest
looks or curiosity. ???
Of course one should have custody of the senses --
but is there not a good 'seeing beauty' in other
women?
-- KJ |
Dear KJ,
I hope that “KJ” does not mean “killjoy!”
Should a man look at a beautiful woman? Yes. Not to
appreciate the beauty and goodness that God has endowed her
would be a sign of ingratitude on our part. For a man, one
of the most beautiful things to see is a beautiful woman,
and I think it works the same way for women with regard to
men. The problem is not in the first look.
But should a man continue to look, so that the look becomes
a lascivious and wanton leer, or a provocative ogling? No.
The problem is in the second look.
What is the difference? The first look is simply knowing
what is out there, a natural curiosity about who this person
is. This glance sees the total person, the woman in the
fullness of her femininity.
The second look is where we get into trouble. Now the look
does not do justice to the full richness of her person.
Rather, now it reduces her to only one set of values, to her
sex appeal. In doing so, we have reduced this woman, this
daughter of God and this sister of ours, to a mere object of
our pleasure. It is wrong to reduce a person down to the
level of an object, to a plaything. In his Theology of the
Body, Pope John Paul II has a lot to say about Jesus’
statement in Matthew 5:27-8: “You have heard it said, You
shall not commit adultery. But I say to you that everyone
who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed
adultery with her in his heart.” I recommend to you his
entire catechesis on the Sermon on the Mount, but especially
the Wednesday audience of 17 Sept 80, “Mutual Attraction
Differs from Lust.”
I quote just one passage: “It is one thing to be conscious
that the value of sex is a part of all the rich storehouse
of values with which the female appears to the man: it is
another to ‘reduce’ all the personal riches of femininity to
that single value, that is, of sex, as a suitable object for
the gratification of sexuality itself. The same reasoning
can be valid concerning what masculinity is for the woman …
The intentional ‘reduction’ is, as can be seen, primarily of
an axiological nature. On the one hand the eternal
attraction of man towards femininity (cf. Gn. 2:23) frees in
him – or perhaps it should free – a gamut of
spiritual-corporal desires of an especially personal and
‘sharing’ nature to which a proportionate pyramid of values
corresponds. On the other hand ‘lust’ limits this gamut,
obscuring the pyramid of values that marks the perennial
attraction of male and female.
“Lust has the internal effect, that is in the ‘heart,’ on
the interior horizon of man and woman, of obscuring the
significance of the body, of the person itself. Femininity
thus ceases being above all else a (legitimate) object for
the man; it ceases being a specific language of the spirit;
it loses its character of being a sign. It ceases, I would
say, bearing in itself the wonderful matrimonial
significance of the body…”
Pope John Paul has some very rich teachings on these
matters. I encourage you to discover them.
Cordially yours,
Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB
mhabiger@kansasmonks.org
- back to
Q & A --
|
|